[videoblogging] Re: The Video Blogger Is Dead

[Heath]

My 2 cents for whatever it's worth, I think this boils down to 2 fundmental 
issues, one, it's not new anymore and it's not just a handfull of people doing 
it and learning how to do it.  And two, it's the lack of commenting or what I 
would call relevant commenting.

When everything is new, everyone is talking about it ALOT, and when it's a 
small group you can keep up with the conversation, you stay involved, "hey how 
did you do that?""hey guess what I just found out!"  When it's new and 
exciting you make a video about everything and anything, people are getting to 
know you.  You find out that you arn't alone that there are other people out 
there who think like you do and what to do the same things you do...when it's 
new, everything is a discovery.  But at some point it stops being new and more 
people start doing it and it gets harder and harder to "know" all the new 
faces...after that you just stop trying because it's overwhelming and then life 
just gets in the way again

When I first started vlogging I used to get comments all the time, not a ton, 
but 4 or 5 sometime more on good days and then I would comment back myself, 
being a part of the conversation.  I would check out the vlogs of those who 
commented and then I would follow them, I would spend hours watching other 
peoples vlogsbecasue it was new and exciting and I could keep up with 
it...but then life happens, we move, I have a grandson and soon, what free time 
I have is spent with the baby and then work gets in the way and now...now I 
hardly comment at all...and I hardly watch at all...it's not because I don't 
want to...I just have other thing filling up my time now...

To make a connection with people you have to invest in time and I think for 
some time is something they don't have anymore, I know I don't, well like I 
said it's just filled with other things...

Video blogging will never be what it was like 5 or 6 years ago, it wont' 
happen, things evolve (note I am speaking of what I consider tradtional 
vlogging, a video on a blog, which is usually personal) It's just part of 
life...but that's ok...

I will say though because of things like I just stated above, this is why I 
love services like Qik and the Android/Iphones...I mean you can shoot these 
little clips of life as they happen and "bam" it's out there, cross posted to 
facebook, Youtube, twitter, heck your own blog...I love this stuff and now that 
mobile video is no longer completly crappy, you have the chance to really see 
and explore the world around you.of course the world around me right now is 
this little rug rat whom I have 5 days a weekbut that's ok too because I 
would rather have time with my grandson than a million views or comments 
anyday...

You know whats weird?  As I type this I recall the point of a lot of early 
vloggers was to show people their lifes around them, to remind people to enjoy 
the life that is all around themmaybe that's what happened...maybe we are 
just enjoying the life that is around us...

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Sullivan  wrote:
>
> well said, Elbows.
> 
> back in the day, i was one who discouraged the term 'videoblogging' to be
> exclusively used for the 'personal diary' genre.  that was a challenging yet
> enjoyable debate for months if not years.  i'm pragmatic in my interest in
> linguistics and since it was important to have common agreed upon
> terminology early on in order to move the discussions forward in new and
> interesting areas... i thought the debate was worth having and fleshing
> out.  not sure what the immediate results were but time and people and
> company decisions tend to mostly sealed the terminologies that we once
> debated.  yet, i hop over to youtube and take a look at the "video blog"
> category and something is not right ;)
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/videos?lg=EN&c=22&b=353&s=subpop
> http://www.youtube.com/channels?c=22&b=353&s=subpop
> 
> this isn't your fathers videoblog!
> 
> generally, the "videoblogging is dead" idea is largely connected to the lack
> of:
> 
> 1) community & intimacy of moment sharers
> 2) discoverability of moment sharers across the interwebs
> 3) desire to share moments for the sake of sharing moments
> 4) bloggers who publish video
> 
> this is all repairable.  but in order to succeed, it has to be done without
> the noise of monetization and ideally without the dependency on a company's
> product that directly requires monetization in order to sustain.  for
> example, i added a comment to Clintus' post and talked about using google
> group/gmail and youtube -
> http://i

[videoblogging] Re: Why Our Civilization's Video Art and Culture is Threatened by the MPEG-LA

[Heath]

I didn't think OSNews story was "hysterical", I thought it brought up some 
valid points and after reading the Endgaget article there are still very valid 
concerns.

"To repeat the point: as an end user, you'll never have to think about your 
legal liability over H.264, because there's no need for you to be licensed 
unless you're distributing commercial content to other end users or building an 
H.264 encoder. We'd venture a guess and say you're probably using a licensed 
camera and software and uploading to services like YouTube or Vimeo or Viddler, 
and that means you're totally in the clear."

So what if you self host your videos and have ads on  your site, is that 
commercial use?  What if you create a DVD of your independent movie and use the 
codec and then sell the DVD?  Have I just distrubuted commercial content?  ( 
yeah, I know like the article said, get a lawyer)

"On top of that, there's a gigantic exception to the license rules that should 
put any lingering fears to rest: using H.264 to distribute free internet video 
to end users doesn't cost a thing, and won't cost anything until at least 2015. 
After that, it's up in the air, and that's a bridge we'll have to cross when we 
come to it -- there's a chance the MPEG-LA could start charging a royalty for 
free video in five years. But for right now MPEG-LA president Larry Horn says 
the group doesn't want to "plug a royalty into a business model that's still 
unsettled." It's also important to note that the MPEG-LA can't just run off and 
do whatever it wants; its decisions are made by the various patent holders it 
represents, many of whom are also still trying to figure out the economics of 
video on the web themselves."

5 years seems like a long time, but trust me, it will be here before we know it 
and more and more videos get created and uploaded daily...And if there is one 
thing I have learned in my short 40 plus years on this planet, its 
this...nothing is ever "free" and with the amount of money we are talking about 
here you better believe they are activly looking for ways to get even more 
money...Just becasuse the guy or guys in charge now say they arn't going to 
charge, doesn't mean they can't or won't change their mind...

"Even if a license fee for free internet video is required after 2015, it's 
still the apparent provider of the video that's on the hook for the license, 
not the content owner or end user -- Google would have to pay the royalty for 
the YouTube videos it hosts, just Apple now has to pay the fee for the movies 
it sells through iTunes and DirecTV has to pay for the content it broadcasts. 
That's a huge distinction, and it's one that all of these companies seem 
comfortable with -- they signed the contracts, after all."

So what happens when companies like Blip, Google, Vimo, etc all start getting 
charged?  I mean Firefox won't pay the like 5 million a year it takes to 
licence the thing now, what will happen when it's double that or more?  Will 
Google or Blip have to start charging people to upload video's? to help cover 
their costs?  If that happens then what happens to user created content?

Most people or corporations don't create things for free, they are in the 
business of making money and they want to make as much of it as they can.  
Because of shareholders, greed or just good ole fashined for the love of money. 
 

Look, I don't pretend to be a smart man, and most of this stuff is over my head 
and to be honest if making video's start costing me money, I can leave it 
behind, no issues...it's just a hobby  But for some people it's not a hobby, 
some people, people here on this list are trying to use the web to make money 
(some are making money now)  What happens to them if they don't pay attention 
to this stuff?  

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "elbowsofdeath"  wrote:
>
> Yay here is a very sensible article that is the perfect antidote to the 
> hysterical OSNews story:
> 
> http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/04/know-your-rights-h-264-patent-licensing-and-you/?s=t5
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Steve
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Sullivan  wrote:
> >
> > Their should just be a formal written statement of exclusion.  maybe content
> > creators and consumers are excluded while manufacturers of hardware and
> > software are not.  Then content creators would know that this will not and
> > does not effect them.  Maybe the fight should be for exemption policy and
> > then rightly let the owners of the technology pursue their monetization in
> > the right direction.  Is this the elephant in the room?  Do they even care
> > about co

[videoblogging] Re: Why Our Civilization's Video Art and Culture is Threatened by the MPEG-LA

[Heath]

I agree about the worst case scenarios usually, however, given the state of on 
line media and given the very real and intense battle going on over copyrights, 
copyright protections, the RIAA suing everyone, the big media corporations 
working harder than ever to buy legsislation, the inability of our elected 
leaders to actually look at an issue, the outdated laws, the judges who have no 
idea about new media, etc...and it's kinda hard NOT to go worst case....

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "elbowsofdeath"  wrote:
>
> Well I think that article raises some important issues. Its more than a tad 
> hysterical in some respects though.
> 
> Lets face it, there is no end of legal smallprint issues, if we paid 
> attention to every last one and assumed worst case scenarios as that article 
> does, I could hardly get out of bed without infringing.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Steve
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "tom_a_sparks"  wrote:
> >
> > http://www.osnews.com/story/23236/Why_Our_Civilization_s_Video_Art_and_Culture_is_Threatened_by_the_MPEG-LA
> > 
> > it looking more and more like GIF/LZW/Unisys, but it called 
> > Microsoft/apple/MPEG-LA/etc
> >
>

[videoblogging] Re: video blogging week 2010, take a moment

[Heath]

well, we all think what we do is crap sometimes, but Mike you are one of the 
most committed vloggers out there and you are comfortable with who you are and 
what you are doing and it shows...and you are so right these moments make up so 
much more than just "those" moments, they are part of a greater story...

simply great man, simply great..

Heath

http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "mgmoon"  wrote:
>
> First off, thanks Heath. It's much appreciated ole friend.
> 
> So, to sum it up, there was a lot of crap that went into this video. But what 
> I mean is, if I only posted the videos that could be described as 'good', I'd 
> have about 5 to draw from. 
> 
> I have hundreds and hundreds of moments, snippets in time, to enjoy now, and 
> down the road. I encourage all of you to start or continue to shoot and share 
> your videos. I can confidently say that these images will probably last a lot 
> longer than any of the people in them. 
> 
> It's never too late to start. In 30 years, will it matter when you got 
> started? I have a real hoot looking back just a couple years, I can only 
> imagine what fun I'll have when I'm 75. 
> 
> VLOG ON BITCHES
> 
> Thank you folks for your comments you've made about the video. It's 
> encouraging and motivating.
> 
> Mike
> (I don't know what happened to the first message I wrote in response. So I 
> banged out this half-assed copy)
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Heath"  wrote:
> >
> > Anyone who does online video should take a moment and watch this
> > 
> > http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2010/04/16/a-moment-2/
> > 
> > From one of the best out there..love ya mike...
> > 
> > Heath
> > http://heathparks.com/blog
> >
>

[videoblogging] video blogging week 2010, take a moment

[Heath]

Anyone who does online video should take a moment and watch this

http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2010/04/16/a-moment-2/

>From one of the best out there..love ya mike...

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

Re: [videoblogging]

[Heath]

I used to love spam as a kid, I mean, meat...in a canit's genius if you 
think about itand then fry it upoh my...heavenpure, pure heaven...

How did something so good get turned into being something so bad

sigh...

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe  wrote:
>
> spam
> 
> On 16 Apr 2010, at 11:12, Ed Smith wrote:
> 
> > http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcmk8xrj_140hbr3j9pb
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: 7D workflow for PC

[Heath]

If you haven't tried Sony Vegas yet, give them a shot...you can get a free full 
working trial for 30 daysFor PC's I think it's the best editing software 
out there

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adam Quirk  wrote:
>
> I just said "thanks Rupert" out loud. Neoscene just made my life much
> easier. I'm kicking myself for sitting on it this whole time.
> 
> Yeah I like Premiere, but it's a fickle mistress. It crashes every once in a
> while, as do all computer programs I suppose. I think it's about the same as
> Final Cut, but I've only used FCP a couple times. I really like the keyframe
> animation options built into Premiere, and it's pretty easy to switch back
> and forth between After Effects and Premiere on the same project. In my
> dreams, AE has audio editing and can import any codec.
> 
> AQ
> 
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Rupert Howe  wrote:
> 
> > I found myself tempted back to PC for the first time yesterday.
> > Realised how often Apple decisions that affect video (in their apps,
> > browsers, phones, Quicktime) have pissed me off and how little I trust
> > them to keep doing the right thing.
> > And then saw this - the Adobe/Nvidia Mercury Playback engine:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xso6CGdsl2c&feature=player_embedded
> > And thought about the possibility of switching back to Adobe CS5 video
> > apps on PC
> > You obviously like Premiere?  I haven't used it properly since the
> > nineties, I don't think.
> >
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> >
> > On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:45, Adam Quirk wrote:
> >
> > > I think I downloaded that and forgot to install it. Trying it now,
> > > thanks.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Rupert Howe
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sorry - pasted wrong link:
> > > > http://www.cineform.com/neoscene/
> > > >
> > > > On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:35, Rupert Howe wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Have you tried using Cineform Neoscene AVIs?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > http://www.videoguys.com/Item/CineForm+Neo+Scene+PC/54E4543435F454E4.aspx
> > > > > Comes highly recommended for easy cutting of 5D Mk2 clips in
> > > full HD
> > > > > with Premiere.
> > > > > Costs $99, but they have a trial.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Rupert
> > > > > http://twittervlog.tv
> > > > >
> > > > > On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:11, Adam Quirk wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> I got a 7D at the beginning of the year and I'm still not
> > > > >> comfortable with
> > > > >> my workflow. Hoping someone here has some experience with it.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 1. Pull clips into my raw video folder using the EOS Utility that
> > > > >> comes with
> > > > >> the camera. This works well.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 2. Convert the 1080p h.264 clips to raw uncompressed AVIs with
> > > > >> converter
> > > > >> software (I use AVS). This is mainly because Premiere won't
> > > import
> > > > >> them as
> > > > >> is. Was hoping to find a preset online to download, but haven't
> > > seen
> > > > >> one
> > > > >> yet.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 3. Pull them down into the timeline and render the whole thing.
> > > If
> > > > >> you don't
> > > > >> do this, it's pretty much unusably jerky. Even after this, it's
> > > not
> > > > >> always
> > > > >> smooth. I have a powerful machine too. I find that if I disable
> > > the
> > > > >> audio, I
> > > > >> can scrub the footage pretty smoothly, but that just means I
> > > have to
> > > > >> disable
> > > > >> the video track when I want to cut to the audio. FML.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 4. Cut, render, compress.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> So this is a bitch and a half, and I have been reading up on
> > > other
> > > > >> people's
> > > > >> 7D workflows around the web, but 90% of them are on Macs. Has
> > > anyone
> > > > >> here
> > > > >> been working with 7D footage on a PC?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > >> Adam
> > > > >>
> > > > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Happy VideoBloggingWeek2010

[Heath]

day 2 "If I could turn back time"

http://heathparks.com/blog/?p=974

heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, ryanne hodson  wrote:
>
> also just posted day 2.
> feels good to be on a video making roll.
> 
> http://ryanedit.blogspot.com/2010/04/videoblogging-week-2010-monday.html
> 
> -ryanne
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 9:13 PM, compumavengal
> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > Day 2 up and running.
> > http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com/2010/04/tranquility-alley-day-2-videoblogging.html
> >
> > Gena
> >
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Streamy disaster

[Heath]

wow makes you wonder what the heck is going onand makes me less interested 
in being a part of things like this...

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Robert Millis  wrote:
>
> Just read Chance's recounting: 
> http://horribleturn.tumblr.com/post/516621948/a-horrible-turn-at-the-streamy-awards
> Youch. Disastrous shows I can laugh off, but it's much worse with the 
> backstory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Powering Independence"
> www.DynamoPlayer.com
> 
> 
> On Apr 12, 2010, at 9:09 PM, Adam Quirk  wrote:
> 
> > Horrible Turn:
> > http://horribleturn.tumblr.com/post/516621948/a-horrible-turn-at-the-streamy-awards
> > 
> > <http://horribleturn.tumblr.com/post/516621948/a-horrible-turn-at-the-streamy-awards>Barrett
> > Garese:
> > http://www.barrettgarese.com/post/516372282/season-one-episode-17
> > 
> > NewTeeVee:
> > http://newteevee.com/2010/04/12/the-streamy-awards-a-producers-apology-and-its-three-fails/
> > 
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Michael Sullivan wrote:
> > 
> > > didnt follow it. where's a good source of this coverage?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 6:17 PM, elbowsofdeath 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > So I hear the Streamy's this year were a disaster in several key ways 
> > > > and
> > > > have gotten all the wrong sort of attention as a result.
> > > >
> > > > There is some concern that it has damaged the image of the 'industry',
> > > > although it may be easy to overstate this point. It certainly didnt 
> > > > help,
> > > > but the 'industry' has enough other problems too, although anything that
> > > > harms potential sponsorship by appearing to confirm potential sponsors
> > > worst
> > > > fears (eg uncontrolled juvenile amateurish smut tarnishing their brands)
> > > > sounds bad to me.
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately there is a part of me that is wildly entertained and 
> > > > amused
> > > > by the streamyfail, considering it to be some kind of justice on a
> > > certain
> > > > level. This isnt fair, as no doubt lots of blameless hard working people
> > > > have been hurt by the streamyfail, but I suppose its a natural
> > > consequence
> > > > of my disdain for the way some of the more visible parts of the
> > > 'industry'
> > > > went, shoddy emulation of the existing media. What better way to
> > > symbolise
> > > > two worlds colliding, and so much wasted potential, than to have a slick
> > > > awards show humbled by technical glitches and naked people.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > > Steve Elbows
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Vloggercue 2010

[Heath]

Who says we didn't?

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe  wrote:
>
> I think that weekend would be the third anniversary of Pixelodeon.   
> Which seems like a scarily long time.I'm pretty sure I came back  
> from Pixelodeon thinking that we were all going to change the world.   
> Much has happened since then... but not that.  Yet.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
> On 9 Apr 2010, at 16:18, Adam Quirk wrote:
> 
> > http://vloggercue.blogspot.com/2010/04/bushwick-starr.html
> >
> > Location
> > secured, working on dates. Shooting for Saturday June 19th. Will  
> > confirm
> > when I know for sure.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Adam Quirk  
> > wrote:
> >
> > > It's official then, if Randy is coming this will be a real party.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 4:23 PM, RANDY MANN   
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> mu bbq im in
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Jay dedman   
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > > I'm heading to a Brooklyn events space tonight at 6:30 to start
> > >> planning
> > >> > > Vloggercue 2010.
> > >> > > The only details I have right now are that it will be in  
> > June, in
> > >> > Brooklyn,
> > >> > > and free. As in free beer, free food, free video screening,  
> > free
> > >> music,
> > >> > free
> > >> > > love.
> > >> > > After tonight I'll have more details to share.
> > >> > > http://vloggercue.blogspot.com/
> > >> >
> > >> > Ryanne and I will make it up this year. Easy reason to visit NYC
> > >> > again. We havent had a good videoblogging hang out in a long  
> > time.
> > >> >
> > >> > Jay
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > http://ryanishungry.com
> > >> > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> > >> > 917 371 6790
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Check week at blip.tv

[Heath]

Like I said, I think it's awesome people are making money doing vlogging, 
online video or whatever it's called.  And speaking personaly of Blip, They are 
great people, as least all those I have met either in person(Charles Hope) or 
online...And it's really cool to see Blip doing well...

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe  wrote:
>
> I'm really happy that you've made it work.  A year ago or so I was  
> really starting to doubt whether anybody would make any money except  
> the big boys (again) - particularly with all the new hardware and  
> closed distribution channels emerging.
> So it's very exciting that there are indie producers making hundreds  
> of thousands.   And that you at Blip have succeeded while always  
> trying to do the right thing.  Great work!  :)
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
> On 9 Apr 2010, at 16:26, mikehudack wrote:
> 
> > Thought I'd chime in about this.
> >
> > Blip.tv's mission is to make independent shows sustainable. We do  
> > this by providing what we call services of scale: technology,  
> > workflow automation, distribution and business development and ad  
> > sales. The theory is that most independent shows are too small to  
> > have all those things in house. So what we do is we aggregate a  
> > bunch of shows together (about 50,000 at last count) and provide  
> > those services to all of them at the same time.
> >
> > Our Dashboard is a key part of this (check out http://blip.tv/tour/  
> > if you're not familiar). Our sales team is, too. We have a full  
> > nationwide sales team -- seven people -- plus two people in London.  
> > Our sales team is in London, Chicago, San Francisco and LA, Texas  
> > and New York. They sell bundles of shows to clients like General  
> > Motors, AT&T, Samsung, Chili's, Best Buy and a bunch of others. We  
> > run those ads across our network and split the revenue 50/50 with  
> > show creators.
> >
> > We pay quarterly. This quarter we sent out a record number of checks  
> > and PayPal payments. Overall we sent out 25% more money than we did  
> > last quarter. A lot of smaller shows are getting smaller checks --  
> > $25, $100, $200... and bigger shows are getting really big checks.  
> > Tens of thousands of dollars. There are now shows that use blip that  
> > are making hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.
> >
> > We're still at the beginning, but we're at the point now where there  
> > are more than a few shows out there with full-time creators. People  
> > who have quit their jobs and are making shows full-time. And there  
> > will be more next month, and more the month after that.
> >
> > We're really excited about what's happening. We're seeing a new  
> > industry emerge. Television networks and big studios have dominated  
> > video creation for sixty years -- ever since NBC debuted at the 1939  
> > Worlds Fair. For the first time in generations it's possible for  
> > talented and driven folks to set out on their own and create their  
> > masterpieces and do it for a living.
> >
> > Let me know if you guys have any questions about our services, ad  
> > sales, payments, whatever. Happy to answer any and all questions  
> > you've got -- skeptical or not. We're an open book. The only thing I  
> > can't talk about is how much specific shows made. That's their  
> > confidential information and up to them to decide whether or not to  
> > share.
> >
> > Yours,
> >
> > Mike
> > Co-founder & CEO, blip.tv
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman   
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This blog post says blip.tv sent a bunch of checks to show  
> > creators. I
> > > know some folks here are also Youtube partners. It would be really
> > > great if independent producers are really getting paid.
> > > http://theblog.blip.tv/post/505915181/this-week-is-check-week-at-blip-tv-were-sending
> > >
> > > I wonder if you can post shows on Youtube and blip...getting paid  
> > for
> > > both. Are they exclusive?
> > > I also cant believe that ads actually work.
> > >
> > > If anyone here has experience as partners on blip/youtube, love to
> > > hear more info.
> > >
> > > Jay
> > >
> > > --
> > > http://ryanishungry.com
> > > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> > > 917 371 6790
> > >
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Check week at blip.tv

[Heath]

That's a big reason I never turned on ads for my vlog, it's so personal, that 
ads seem stupid to put on them honestly...and then there is the whole fact that 
I only get a few hundred fews per video, if I am lucky, so there is no point 
for me.  I did turn it on for some of the other vids I have made for other 
sites, but I don't expect much.

It seems quaint nowdays, but I make video's for me, I put them out for me and 
the few friends I have made in this space.  I'm never going to make money of 
video, it's just not going to happen, lot's of different reason's why but it 
all boils down to this.  I make video's because I can...it's awesome some are 
making money and such, it really is.

but as for me and my house, it's all about the grandbaby right now...lol

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe  wrote:
>
> It's always about context, isn't it?  I'm used to seeing adverts on  
> videos now, but rarely even notice them.  It's usually when they're  
> getting in the way or are inappropriate that I notice them - and  
> that's not a good thing.
> That said, I think there are quite a lot of people making reasonable  
> pocket money from blogs and videos.  If you're into making videos that  
> other people want to watch, and you can build an audience, there's  
> some money there.
> 
> TubeMogul did a survey of their web video producers last year, and  
> found that on average they got $12 per 1000 views.  Which is in line  
> with an average ad price across different media of $10-15 per thousand  
> impressions.
> 
> Last month was my 5 year vlogiversary, and over that 5 years I've had  
> around a million views of my videoblog posts on different sites.  So  
> that'd have been about $12,000 over five years if I'd run adverts.   
> Which would be better than a kick in the face, but not exactly a  
> living wage.  And the presence of adverts would most definitely not  
> have fitted with almost any of my content.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
> On 9 Apr 2010, at 13:24, Jay dedman wrote:
> 
> > > I don't know about Blip, but as I've mentioned before, I'm a  
> > Youtube partner and I certainly make money from it, as I do from  
> > Google ads on my blog site.
> > > I'm not allowed to say how much, but it's not insignificant. Not
> > > enough to live off to be sure, but I've only got several thousand
> > > regular viewers.
> > > If you extrapolate, and my audience increased say 10 fold, I could  
> > probably do it full time and make a meager living.
> > > I know another video blogger who has roughly those audience  
> > figures, and he has mentioned that within the next year he might  
> > take it full-time if growth continues.
> > > I just hit my first anniversary video blogging too.
> >
> > It's been good to hear your past experience. I believe blip focuses on
> > ads INSIDE the video (either pre-roll, mid-roll, or post-roll)...not
> > sure if Youtube does this. Ive wondered if people are out off by ads
> > in videos they watch. Text ads on the page seem easy enough to ignore.
> > Is anyone here a blip partner?
> >
> > Does Youtube or blip make you sign a exclusive contract with them...or
> > can you put the same content in both places to collect two checks?
> > Just wondering how all this plays out.
> >
> > Dave, huge congrats on the first year anniversary.
> >
> > jay
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Mefeedia State of the Vlogosphere 2010

[Heath]

I missed this because I was on my self impossed break, but I agree with Rupert 
in that the most interesting bit of information to me is the 1:15 time limit.  
It seems our or should I say the average comsumer of online video, like vlogs, 
wants the video's very short and sweet.  Which was something that was preached 
here often.  But I have noticed that for the most part it was like around the 
3:00 mark that most people wanted to stay at or under.  Then for a bit people 
would make some longer ones but now it seems we are back to about a minute.

Which to be honest, I am not sure I really understand.  I mean most people can 
watch an hour show no problems, watch a 3 hour movie no problem, but a "vlog", 
and people can't spare more than a minute or two to watch...it seems weird.

I am not sure why it is, I mean even for me, there are only a handful of vlogs 
I watch on a regular basis, because I decieded a while ago, that I had to limit 
myself to those people I really like.  Now that's not to say I don't occasionly 
surf and find something or someone else, but even I find myself getting antsy 
after a few minutes of watching...

like I said, weird...

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe  wrote:
>
> Yes, I posted about it on 22 Jan - nobody replied.  There's some good  
> stuff there.
> 
> Particularly things like that the average watch time for a short form  
> video online is 1:15.
> 
> And that YouTube is only 36% of all video tracked by Mefeedia.
> Blip and Vimeo combined are 23%.
> Which obviously leaves a quite significant 41% divided between other  
> sources.
> 
> The average vlogger syndicates to 3.6 sites.
> 
> Playstation 3 and the Wii are the big players in video via TV at the  
> moment.
> 
> On 2 Mar 2010, at 03:50, compumavengal wrote:
> 
> > Not sure if folks saw this or not. I searched the archives and  
> > didn't see a mention. http://blog.mefeedia.com/vlog-2010
> >
> > Also mentioned at Tech Crunch
> > http://techcrunch.com/2010/01/05/mefeedia-state-of-the-vlogosphere-2010/
> >
> > Gena
> > http://createvideonotebook.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Remember when it was all 320x240?

[Heath]

Oh, I just had to comment on this, for me I will always use Blip as long as 
they are around and as long as they contiue to provide the excellent customer 
service they have been known for.  A few different reasons why, one - when all 
the other video sites, including YT had crappy TOS's, crappy customer service 
(not really sure that has gotten better for the other services), poor quality, 
etc...Blip was leading the way by offering Creative Commens, excellent customer 
service (remember the blizzard that hit NY a few years ago and Mike plowed his 
way to the office to get the service back up and running) and they cared about 
the creatorsto me that should mean something...

Now it doesn't mean blind loyality on my part or anyone's part as I think you 
have to keep inovating and moving the ball forward.  

By no means do I mean that YT is not good, I mean there are a few billion 
reasons why they areI just happen to like Blip better for the reasons 
above...that and to be a bit honest, Goggle already has enough of my personal 
information

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe  wrote:
>
> I am finding fewer and fewer reasons to avoid YouTube.   YouTube's  
> quality now is as good as Blip - better than their flvs, in fact - the  
> new layout on their pages is good, and so are their sharing options.
> 
> Get round the bad bits by turning off comments and ratings, and add  
> &showinfo=0 to your embed code to remove the ugly text title & star  
> rating from the embedded player.
> 
> I just made a 1 minute profile video for my wife's business, and  
> embedded it on her home page as a YouTube player.  It looks good. You  
> can see it at:
> http://londonalexandertechnique.co.uk/
> 
> Previously I would have used Blip for this, but they and Vimeo now  
> prohibit you from publishing any videos which promote businesses.   I  
> think I'm going to be using YouTube a lot more from now on, for  
> everything.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
> On 6 Feb 2010, at 00:08, Jay dedman wrote:
> 
> > > They don't make you an HD flash version but blip has always  
> > supported
> > > any size file you want to put up there. You can just add a 1080p  
> > file
> > > (along with lots of other formats) when you upload.
> >
> > Thats why blip is good. They are almost completely format agnostic.
> > For instance, I use always blip when I need to post an mp3.
> >
> > Jay
> >
> > --
> > http://ryanishungry.com
> > http://momentshowing.net
> > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> > 917 371 6790
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Video website payments and accountability

[Heath]

It's funny, I can remember a time on this list when anyone talking about "ads" 
in videoblogs would start a huge flame war, I even remember a video Jay did 
talking about his mom and this very serious thing and then he went into this 
whole "sponsered by Coke" thing...

The times are truly are a changing...lol

This message has been brought to you by GE and Comcast, making our lives a 
little better each day through greenspace and copyright protection.

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Miles  wrote:
>
> My only advice here is
> 
> a) you have to sign an agreement to host your stuff through the service
> b) a standard clause in all such agreements is the one that says these  
> terms may change
> 
> So what you think you signed up for will change (quite quickly, there  
> are projects that map the changes in user agreements and they  
> generally change *a lot*).
> 
> On 16/12/2009, at 10:36 AM, caminofilm wrote:
> 
> > Recently a fellow filmmaker contacted me about 5min.com. He had  
> > concerns about them putting his videos on other sites like  
> > Bukisa.com and Watchdoit, something that wasn't discussed when he  
> > gave permission for 5min's to use his vids.
> >
> > There are only two sites that I would recommend to video producers  
> > with regard to ad revenue. Youtube and blinkx. Other sites (like  
> > blip.tv) despite running ads in my videos, have never returned one  
> > cent!
> >
> > As an Australian, dealing with these online video sites (based in  
> > locations as diverse as Israel and the US) what legal recourse to I  
> > have to checking a video sites accounting practices, and withdrawing  
> > my content?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cheers
> Adrian Miles
> adrian.mi...@...
> Program Director, Bachelor of Communication Honours
> vogmae.net.au
>

[videoblogging] Re: should a Flip Mino be better than a 5year-old MiniDV camera

[Heath]

Glad you are liking Vegas, as most around here know, I am a long term Vegas 
user.  I recommend it to everyone who is editing on a PC.  As far as editing 
goes, you will get better the more and more you do it, it just happens as a 
by-product of creating videos.

Heath 
http://heathparks.com/blog1

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Chad Boeninger  wrote:
>
> Hi Rupert,
> I got a Canon SD 780 IS a few weeks ago, and it records in both HD and SD
> as MOV files. I may have to take the plunge and get Vegas so I can edit the
> MOV files.  The trial of Vegas is working out pretty well, so it's a matter
> of getting off my wallet when the trial expires.   I did a comparison of my
> various cameras a few days ago.  The Canon video is
> http://libraryvoice.blip.tv/file/2476370/ , the Flip is
> http://libraryvoice.blip.tv/file/2476039/.  Not exactly scientific, as the
> files were rendered in different ways, but you get the idea that the Canon
> does have slightly better quality, has a better mic, allows for zooming (not
> while recording) and multiple exposure options.  I'm not very accustomed to
> working in non-WMV file formats, so Vegas and MOV may take getting used to
> if I am to take full advantage of the Canon.  Thanks for the input.
> 
> --Chad
> 
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Rupert Howe  wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > I really recommend you check out the Canon's 640x480 picture and
> > sound. Canon's point and shoot cameras generally shoot fantastic
> > colours and have great sound. And obviously they double as great
> > stills cameras as well... so they're useful things to slip into your
> > pocket. I love them for videoblogging. Also Canon stores clips in
> > AVI files, which go into Movie Maker nicely.
> >
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> >
> > On 17-Aug-09, at 6:49 PM, Chad Boeninger wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > > I'm in the process of getting ready to expand my offering of
> > > educational
> > > library videos with a new show and would like some feedback.
> > > Basically the
> > > show will go as follows: 1. I introduce the topic on camera, 2. I
> > > show a
> > > screencast of a business database or website, 3. I sum up the
> > > episode on
> > > camera. (while not a business database video, this example,
> > > http://libraryvoice.blip.tv/file/2438408/ , gives you an idea of the
> > > flow of
> > > the show) Currently my two options for recording the camera pieces
> > > are a
> > > Flip Mino and a Canon Elura 60 (a budget mini-DV camcorder from
> > > 2004). The
> > > camcorder was originally a gift when my first son was born, and I
> > > have not
> > > used it much. I'd like to get some more use out of it. However, it
> > > looks
> > > like my Flip Mino, which I've had for a year now, beats the Canon in
> > > terms
> > > of video quality, but the Canon has louder audio. I'm a rookie when it
> > > comes to messing with manual settings, but can you recommend
> > > anything that I
> > > can try to eek out better video from the Canon? For comparison of
> > > the two,
> > > take a look at this short video.
> > http://libraryvoice.blip.tv/file/2484863/
> > > .
> > >
> > > I've also got a Canon 780 IS that records HD video (as well as
> > > 640x480), but
> > > my computing power is not yet up to editing HD video.
> > >
> > > Any input you may have would be appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Chad
> > >
> > > --
> > > Chad F. Boeninger
> > > libraryvoice.com - blog
> > > libraryvoice.com/videos - videoblog
> > > twitter.com/cfboeninger
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Chad F. Boeninger
> libraryvoice.com - blog
> libraryvoice.com/videos - videoblog
> twitter.com/cfboeninger
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Opera Unite, a game changer?

[Heath]

An interesting idea, being able to share files, photo's etc all within a web 
browser.  It could have tremendous potentional for video...I am curious to see 
what happens..

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/nf/20090616/tc_nf/67188

Opera on Tuesday unveiled a technology that aims to disrupt the client-server 
computing model of the Web. Dubbed Opera Unite, the technology turns any 
computer into both a client and a server so it can interact with and serve 
content to other computers directly across the Web. Unite eliminates the need 
for third-party servers. 

Opera CEO John von Tetzchner said Opera is opening up the full potential of the 
Web to everyone. PCs decentralized computing from large mainframes, he said, 
and Opera Unite is taking the next step by decentralizing the cloud. 

"With server capability in the browser, Web developers can create Web 
applications with profound ease," von Tetzchner said. "Consumers have the 
flexibility to choose private and efficient ways of sharing information. We 
believe Opera Unite is one of our most significant innovations yet, because it 
changes forever the fundamental fabric of the Web." 

More Privacy, Open Standards 

Opera pointed to the benefits of Unite for both consumers and Web developers. 
For consumers, the company said Unite's cadre of services offers greater 
control of private data and makes it possible to share data with any device 
equipped with a modern Web browser. 

On the Web developer side, Opera Unite simplifies the equation. Since Opera 
Unite services are based on the same open Web standards as Web sites today, 
creating cutting-edge Web services is less complex. Opera said Unite makes 
creating a full Web service as easy as coding a Web page. 

"What interests me about Opera Unite is how current technology and the social 
world are now interconnected," said Molly Holzschlag, an Opera Web evangelist. 
"Using open standards, including HTML, CSS and JavaScript, developers and even 
enthusiasts with a little standards savvy can make their own Opera Unite 
service. Opera Unite allows people the ability to be imaginative with their 
skills and create a wide range of technical and social applications using the 
same open standards used today." 

Building Your Own Cloud 

Opera Unite is available in a special version of the Opera 10 desktop browser 
from Opera Labs. Opera Unite services include File Sharing, Web Server, Media 
Player, Photo Sharing, The Lounge, and Fridge. Most of those services are 
familiar to Web surfers, while The Lounge and Fridge are Opera's unique spin on 
Web-based communications. 

The Lounge is a self-contained chat service running on your computer. A user's 
friends can access the chat room via a direct link. That means they are not 
required to sign into any particular service. Depending on the user's privacy 
settings, only a generated password is needed in order for people to log in to 
the chat room. 

Fridge users can post a note on their friends' virtual refrigerators. When a 
user shares a direct link to their refrigerator, the users and their friends, 
family or colleagues can exchange notes securely and privately in real time. 

Michael Gartenberg, a vice president at Interpret, called Unite a powerful 
concept that could give it a unique position in the browser wars. The 
challenge, he said, is evangelizing developers to build applications on top of 
Unite and explaining to consumers how this enables them to build their own 
cloud services rather than relying on companies like Yahoo, Google or 
Microsoft. 

"Certainly there's enough practical features to get people using Unite," 
Gartenberg said. "With this type of technology, anyone could host their own 
Twitter service for themselves and their friends if they wanted to, for 
example. There's a lot of potential, bandwidth and horsepower here that people 
can tap into. Opera is definitely on to something innovative."

Heath 
http://heathparks.com

[videoblogging] Re: Open Video Ideas

[Heath]

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman   
> Anyway...i still do think that an "open video/story engine" would
> help. The fact that you use Sony Vegas and I use iMovie/FCP...makes it
> a little more difficult for us to work together without having to
> figure out the technical aspects in between.
> 
> Jay


In that I completely agree...having a standard or open video editing/processing 
platform would be great for collaborations and I think we need to remember that 
"open" doesn't have to mean free...because at some point that people making all 
this I am sure would like to have some compensation for their time, effort, 
etc...So some of being open to open standards is for us as storytellers 
editors, etc is to embrace these new techs and share the knowledge...

Although I will admit, it's hard to balance the creative and tech sides of 
me

Heath
http://heathparks.com

> 
> 
> -- 
> http://ryanishungry.com
> http://jaydedman.com
> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> 917 371 6790
>

[videoblogging] Re: Open Video Ideas

[Heath]

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Richard (Show) Hall"  wrote:


> I've been teaching this digital media class the last three >semesters, and
> technology is a huge barrier to creativity.
> 
> First, we only have PCs, so we can't go with FCP, so we go with >Premiere
> Pro, which is functionally find, but has all sorts of issues dealing >with
> different types of files/codecs. 

Just use Sony Vegas Richard, it's much better  :-)

Heath Parks
http://heathparks.com/blog1

[videoblogging] Re: Reminder: Open Video Conference in June

[Heath]

Hmmm I wonder if I should keep up my streak of NOT going to events with other 
vloggers or should I break trend and go.

Seeing Richard and Rupert and a few others may be worth it

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Richard (Show) Hall"  wrote:
>
> Ok ... not only am I seriously considering going, but I registered, made
> reservations and everything ... so I am going, and it took me two emails to
> say so ... see you there ... richard
> 
> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Richard (Show) Hall <
> rich...@...> wrote:
> 
> > I'm seriously considering going.
> >
> > ...peace...richard
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Jay dedman  wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > I was told the rooms are about $170/night with the group rate, so I'd
> >> > be interested in a roomshare if anyone else is.
> >> > Are people planning on staying elsewhere? I want to make sure I'm
> >> > where the action is :-)
> >>
> >> People are staying all over town...usually couchsurfing with friends.
> >> I know its expensive to stay in NYC. The hostels are considerably
> >> cheaper, but offer much less privacy.
> >>
> >> You could make a page on http://videoblogginggroup.pbwiki.com/ if you
> >> wanted to start a place to find room sharing.
> >>
> >> The event is at NYU...so Im sure all the after parties will take place
> >> in Lower East Side.
> >>
> >> Jay
> >>
> >> --
> >> http://ryanishungry.com
> >> http://jaydedman.com
> >> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> >> 917 371 6790
> >>  
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Richard (Show) Hall
> > http://richardshow.org
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Richard (Show) Hall
> http://richardshow.org
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Joe Biden sucks up to Hollywood?

[Heath]

Couple of interesting articles I saw today.  I have said it before and will say 
it againit is looking more and more that this administration is very pro 
MPAA and RIAA.and with an IP Czar getting ready to be posted soon, I worry 
about the future quite frankly...I would have thought that a person who used 
the internet so brilliantly during the campaign would have a better 
understanding, but I guess not

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090422/1727474611.shtml

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10224689-38.html?tag=newsEditorsPicksArea.0

The Obama administration continues to give in to pretty much every wish of the 
entertainment industry. At an MPAA-sponsored dinner, VP Joe Biden repeated a 
bunch of Hollywood talking point myths as fact, and promised stronger 
intellectual property enforcement. He incorrectly referred to file sharing as 
"pure theft," claimed that it hurt the economy (with no evidence to support 
that) and said that it caused lost jobs. Of course, the industry has been 
putting out bogus studies claiming such notions, but they're easily debunked 
when you look at the details. Biden also promised that the "IP czar" would be 
"the right person," which (given the audience was Hollywood execs) almost 
certainly means someone who will roll over and obey the industry, rather than 
focus on actually increasing innovation and protecting consumer rights. 

Earlier at the event, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke noted that the recent leak 
of Wolverine "underscores the problem the industry faces," while saying that he 
"believes in the full and impartial enforcement of the law." Again, as has been 
discussed widely, the leak of Wolverine doesn't demonstrate any problem at all. 
Plenty of people will still go see the movie in the theater, and if the 
industry had reacted intelligently, it could have turned the leak into a 
marketing coup. Instead, it acted stupidly, and because of that, the 
administration is going to bend over backwards to help the industry keep acting 
stupid rather than adapt. What a shame. 

These moves represent a real loss to the economy, society and culture. For 
whatever reason (money has a lot to do with it), the administration seems to 
have bought into the totally unsubstantiated claim that there is only one 
business model for entertainment (selling content), and thus it needs to create 
laws to make sure that such a business model works. In doing so, it's creating 
massive inefficiencies, decreasing content production and making it even more 
difficult for new and innovative business models and services to thrive.

Heath
http://heathparks.com

[videoblogging] Re: Three Years

[Heath]

Mike has made over 600 video's in three years, an awesome feat, he is the 
man...the man I say..

And I remember that freevlog video too...in fact I used parts of it for my last 
video for videoblogging weekit's fun to think, sitting on my hard drive is 
a piece of video history!!

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog1

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Moon"  wrote:
>
> Thanks Jay.
> 
> I still remember watching G4 Tech TV three years ago and an episode about 
> video blogging. 
> The episode featured Ryanne and Michael Verdi. I think they were on a roof 
> top and talking about http://www.freevlog.org and the ease to put video on 
> the internet. "A video diary".
> Within 3 weeks of watching that episode, I shot my first vlog. 
> (Back then, I pronounced it vee-log. :)
> 
> It's been a hoot.
> 
> Mike
> http://vlog.mikemoon.net
> 
>  
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman  wrote:
> >
> > > Well, I just past my anniversary of 3 years Video Blogging.
> > > 3 years down, 45 or so to go.
> > > http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2009/04/19/three-years/
> > 
> > Congrats! Keep it up Mike. You've always been the man of endurance
> > when it comes to videoblogging.
> > 
> > Jay
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > http://ryanishungry.com
> > http://jaydedman.com
> > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> > 917 371 6790
> >
>

[videoblogging] Re: work around for no fire wire?

[Heath]

what can I say, it works for me, Sony Vegas and Windows, for me a match made in 
heaven  lolAnd I gave up on the Bengals a while ago...

Oh, and for the record, I am buying a new PC, not because I need one, I am 
buying one, because I want one  :-)

My old PC will become the official "office" computer in our new home...hooked 
up to my 26" LCD tv..can't wait...

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog1

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, John Coffey  
wrote:
>
> 
> Haha, Heath is the only PC person I usually read on this list, just to see 
> how he dedicated to Windows he is. Just like a tired and broke Bengals or 
> Jets fan.
> 
> JC
> 
> --- On Fri, 4/17/09, Heath  wrote:
> 
> > From: Heath 
> > Subject: [videoblogging] Re: work around for no fire wire?
> > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Friday, April 17, 2009, 9:43 AM
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   
> >   well..since Rupert and Verdi said something...
> > .I guess I can chime in.  As you are all aware, I am a PC
> > guy, edit, work, etc on a PC.  Now I have, in the past
> > expressed my frustration with certain aspects of windows,
> > however, as an everyday work PC and editing PC, it's
> > worked most of the time.  Now, I don't want to hear that
> > nothing ever goes wrong with a Mac, because we all know
> > that's not true, it's a machine with moving parts,
> > things break
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I have looked at a Mac a few times, but the cost is
> > prohibative.  Cause it's not just about the hardware,
> > everything I have as far as ecosystem is related to a PC,
> > and yes I can run boot camp or I can run programs virtually
> > but I still hear of problems with that at times.  And then I
> > still have to buy a full version of the MS OS, which further
> > adds to the cost
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I am not anti Mac, but for me and my budget, I am still
> > better off with a PC, even adding in the cost of virus
> > software.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I have learned that it's not really about who is
> > better, it's just about what you like and what you are
> > used toand what works for you as a person...for me a PC
> > works, even when it's a tad frustrating. ...In fact I am
> > getting ready to get a new computer when I move into the new
> > housenot sure which yet, but it's just time for a
> > new one, maybe a blu-ray player as well  :-)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Now if I was good looking, maybe I could get MS to pony up
> > some money and be featured on one of those, "I'm a
> > PC" commercials. ...
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Heath
> > 
> > http://heathparks.
> > com/blog1
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In videoblogging@
> > yahoogroups. com, Rupert  wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > 
> > > I can't believe nobody took you up on this.
> > 
> > > But yeah, I agree.
> > 
> > > I've had to live with both Windows and Macs for
> > the last 10 years, and  
> > 
> > > Windows has caused me and my clients many, many more
> > headaches than  
> > 
> > > Mac.  And that's mostly just XP.  For me,
> > there's just no comparison  
> > 
> > > between the nightmare of Vista and Mac OSX.  I know
> > three people who  
> > 
> > > have gone Mac in the last few months because they just
> > couldn't cope  
> > 
> > > with Vista any more. Unsurprisingly, they're now
> > calmer and happier.
> > 
> > > Though I suppose I shouldn't be too hard on
> > Windows - back when I was  
> > 
> > > doing local freelance IT support, the suffering it
> > caused paid my  
> > 
> > > mortgage.
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > On 16-Apr-09, at 6:20 AM, Michael Verdi wrote:
> > 
> > > >
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Michael Sullivan
> >  > 
> > > > > wrote:
> > 
> > > > > 2+ years experience using a macbookpro
> > everyday...
> > 
> > > > >
> > 
> > > > > macs are way over-hyped/over- priced.
> > 
> > > > > but hey, you'll be hip like that.  ;)
> > 
> > > >
> > 
> > > > 9 years of making a living using Apple's pro
> > laptop (15 years going
> > 
> > > > back to my Mac SE) and I have to disagree with
> > that vigorously. All
> > 
> > > > the time and frustration I've saved while
> > just being able to get on
> > 
> > > > with getting things done is not to be discounted.
> > I'm not saying they
> > 
> > > > are perfect - they're not but come on.
> > 
> > > > Not wanting to start a platform war...
> > 
> > > > Verdi
> > 
> > > >
> > 
> > > > -- 
> > 
> > > > http://michaelverdi .com
> > 
> > > >
> > 
> > > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > 
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
>

[videoblogging] Re: work around for no fire wire?

[Heath]

well..since Rupert and Verdi said somethingI guess I can chime in.  As 
you are all aware, I am a PC guy, edit, work, etc on a PC.  Now I have, in the 
past expressed my frustration with certain aspects of windows, however, as an 
everyday work PC and editing PC, it's worked most of the time.  Now, I don't 
want to hear that nothing ever goes wrong with a Mac, because we all know 
that's not true, it's a machine with moving parts, things break

I have looked at a Mac a few times, but the cost is prohibative.  Cause it's 
not just about the hardware, everything I have as far as ecosystem is related 
to a PC, and yes I can run boot camp or I can run programs virtually but I 
still hear of problems with that at times.  And then I still have to buy a full 
version of the MS OS, which further adds to the cost

I am not anti Mac, but for me and my budget, I am still better off with a PC, 
even adding in the cost of virus software.

I have learned that it's not really about who is better, it's just about what 
you like and what you are used toand what works for you as a person...for 
me a PC works, even when it's a tad frustratingIn fact I am getting ready 
to get a new computer when I move into the new housenot sure which yet, but 
it's just time for a new one, maybe a blu-ray player as well  :-)

Now if I was good looking, maybe I could get MS to pony up some money and be 
featured on one of those, "I'm a PC" commercials

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog1


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert  wrote:
>
> I can't believe nobody took you up on this.
> But yeah, I agree.
> I've had to live with both Windows and Macs for the last 10 years, and  
> Windows has caused me and my clients many, many more headaches than  
> Mac.  And that's mostly just XP.  For me, there's just no comparison  
> between the nightmare of Vista and Mac OSX.  I know three people who  
> have gone Mac in the last few months because they just couldn't cope  
> with Vista any more. Unsurprisingly, they're now calmer and happier.
> Though I suppose I shouldn't be too hard on Windows - back when I was  
> doing local freelance IT support, the suffering it caused paid my  
> mortgage.
> 
> 
> On 16-Apr-09, at 6:20 AM, Michael Verdi wrote:
> >
> 
> > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 7:58 AM, Michael Sullivan  > > wrote:
> > > 2+ years experience using a macbookpro everyday...
> > >
> > > macs are way over-hyped/over-priced.
> > > but hey, you'll be hip like that.  ;)
> >
> > 9 years of making a living using Apple's pro laptop (15 years going
> > back to my Mac SE) and I have to disagree with that vigorously. All
> > the time and frustration I've saved while just being able to get on
> > with getting things done is not to be discounted. I'm not saying they
> > are perfect - they're not but come on.
> > Not wanting to start a platform war...
> > Verdi
> >
> > -- 
> > http://michaelverdi.com
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: the coming Broadband limit?

[Heath]

I had forgetten it was a supreme court ruling, I had thought it was just an FCC 
ruling...

If I remember correctly the crux of the arguement, was that telephone companies 
wanted the cable companies to lease their lines like they had to, as cable 
companies were begining to get in on providing internet service.  They argued 
since they had to do it, so should the cable companies, but the cable companies 
were able to argue that they were not a telecommuncation service, they were 
just providing bits of data.

Well most consumer groups and others who actually care about these types of 
things knew this was bunkbut the boneheads who are in charge of the supreme 
court bought the cable companies arguement...and what do we have?  No real 
competition and continued price hikes and the little guy getting screwed 
again...

In fact if I remember correctly, the cable companies argued that by allowing 
their lines to be leased they would have to raise rates and possibly go to 
tiered pricing which would be bad for consumers

I guess the only recouse any of us have is that the FCC and Congress gets their 
heads out of their asses and adjust the laws accordingly and take control of 
the issue.

So I guess we should just bend over now, right

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Richard (Show) Hall"  wrote:
>
> For the record, ISP competition was squelched legally, so it's not even
> really possible to have competition with high speed internet.
> 
> The supreme court ruled in 2005 that cable companies were not bound by
> common carriage laws (they did not have to allow competitors use their lines
> like phone companies have to). This was followed by a decision by the FCC
> that DSL was also free to ignore common carriage.
> 
> So, in most places in the US you have a choice of DSL or Cable and only one
> company for each, and, in many places (like where I live) there is only one
> choice (DSL).
> 
> For anyone more interested in details I wrote a blog post about it a while
> ago.
> 
> http://richardshow.org/blog/2008/02/15/free-market-net-neutrality-and-common-carriage/
> 
> ... Richard
> 
> 
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Rupert  wrote:
> 
> > Yes, it's true that it's limited in the UK.  But there's a lot of
> > competition between providers, which I understand is not the case in
> > the US - or in Canada.  Or at least there was a lot of competition
> > last time I looked.  Hundreds of independent local companies.  Elbows
> > would probably know more and confirm or deny this...
> >
> > On 10-Apr-09, at 2:09 PM, Jay dedman wrote:
> >
> > > I mentioned this in another thread, but I think it's important enough
> > > to repost here. In the US, the major broadband providers are planning
> > > to ending "unlimited" packages and start charging for broadband.
> > > Time/Warner is the test case. See below.
> > >
> > > I've heard that limiting bandwidth is common in Europe (true?), but
> > > this is new behavior in the US where broadband providers have now
> > > consolidated into just 4 major corporations that now control internet
> > > access in most regions.
> > >
> > > As private companies, they can do what they want. Customers now must
> > > start making a choice of who they want to support.
> > >
> > > Jay
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __
> > >
> > > Rep. Eric Massa was outspoken in his opposition to Time Warner Cable's
> > > plan, calling it a monopolistic move to penalize robust Net users and
> > > "stagnate the 21st Century technology needed to rebuild America."
> > >
> > > What really happening is TWC is unfairly trying to protect its cable
> > > TV profits from people switching over to online video. By making it
> > > prohibitively expensive for their 8.4 million customers to do much
> > > more than email and basic Web surfing, they hope to kill Internet
> > > video before it's any more popular.
> > >
> > > We're going out to our 500,000 activists asking other members of
> > > Congress to join Massa and call for a thorough investigation of these
> > > ant-competitive practices.
> > >
> > > Making Time Warner the Internet's evil poster child is particularly
> > > urgent now. Other cable and phone providers (including AT&T, Charter,
> > > Cox and Comcast) are watching TWC's trial balloon with plans to
> > > implement their own anti-video pricing schemes.
> > >
> > > The outreach is below. Here's the presser:
> > http://www.freepress.net/node/56030
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Richard (Show) Hall
> http://richardshow.org
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: the coming Broadband limit?

[Heath]

I have beat this drum for a long time now.the lack of competition and 
regulation is leading to a growing number of abuses and practices, at least 
here in the states...

And while yes, as a private company they can charge whatever they want, as has 
been noted numurous times, what continues to happen is in most area's they have 
a vitural monolopy and with the FCC rulings in their favor, local muncipalities 
have not been able to do anything about arbritary rate hikes, etc.

Almost all of the rules and regulations regarding cable and now broadband are 
completely outdated and in most cases don't apply or the rules have never taken 
into account the growth of broadband and the new delivery systems

Not to mention that rural broadband is virtualy non-exsistant or so cost 
prohibitated that most people in the country don't even know what "high-speed" 
internet is.

That and the fact you have providers who are now also producing and creating 
content, will that content be regulated?you and I know it won'tthey 
will strike deals or "exclusive contracts" with certain kinds of content or 
lock it up altogether and without meaningfull competition, where are we going 
to go?  We will be stuck with a take it or leave it attitude and they will be 
able to get away with it, because in the end who really cares about us?

We must let ourselves be heard, we must do something nowI firmly believe 
this with every fiber of my being

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman  wrote:
>
> > OK $150 a month for 'virtually unlimited' seems a tad pricey. Maybe
> > $75/month for 100GB is slightly more sane though, does anybody who uses a
> > lot of video online monitor their bandwidth to see if they get anywhere near
> > 100GB a month?
> > Its expensive enough to moan at the companies involved, but isnt extreme
> > enough to confirm that 'they hope to kill Internet video before it's any
> > more popular.' which is what that thing you pasted is trying to suggest in a
> > rather hysterical way.
> 
> Hmmmattention grabbing but not hysterical.
> Currentlya single HD show is usually about 750MB. Almost a gig.
> The size of files will only increase as quality gets better.
> Start doing the math based on the things you watch.
> 
> we arent even calculating the amount of bandwidth a person uses for
> daily web use.
> 
> If someone must think about every megabyte they download, this factor
> weighs on the choice to download a video by some unknown.
> 
> > If we are thinking that in the near future people will be watching many
> > hours of high-def TV via the internet every day, then there are capacity
> > issues which someone will have to pay for. I never heard what happened to
> > the battle in the UK between the ISPs and the BBC who were using peer2peer
> > to make TV shows available to customers, thus saddling the ISPs with a
> > greater bandwidth bill, causing them to moan, All I know is that viewers
> > have certainly embraced downloading TV shows legitimately via the net here,
> > and so far there has not been any substantial change to ISP price structure
> > or quality of service as a result.
> 
> Until broadband providers give proof that the networks are overloaded,
> I think this argument is specious.
> 
> The strategy is to squeeze more profit out of broadband, especially if
> people continue to cancel their cable TV subscriptions because they
> are just pulling down the shows they want to watch. Fair enough. These
> companies are private and can charge 10 per GB if they want. But
> let's all be very aware of the truth behind the decisions, so
> consumers can make clear choices. This also allows us as voters to
> make sure government is not giving unfair monopolies to private
> companies who are squeezing every cent out of their customers.
> 
> Jay
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://ryanishungry.com
> http://jaydedman.com
> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> 917 371 6790
>

[videoblogging] Re: VideoBloggingWeek2009 Finale

[Heath]

I ended videobloggingweek 2009 by showing everyone's whose fault it is I am on 
the internet making vlogs.

http://heathparks.com/blog1/?p=355

Congrats to us all for another week of great video's!

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog1

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Ian Beaumont"  wrote:
>
> Yep, it's over, and I felt it was a tough week to do.  I've done a few video 
> posts before, but to do a week of posts with good content was tough.  I'm 
> quite sure that I could have done things a lot better, but some of that was 
> down to just plain nerves.  Anyway, I'll list all 7 posts here, and feel free 
> to give me any feedback you want to.  
> 
> Day 1: 
> http://cityprod.blogspot.com/2009/04/this-is-my-first-video-blog-post-for.html
> Day 2: 
> http://cityprod.blogspot.com/2009/04/video-blogging-week-on-viewpoint-day-2.html
> Day 3: 
> http://cityprod.blogspot.com/2009/04/video-blogging-week-on-viewpoint-day-3.html
> Day 4: 
> http://cityprod.blogspot.com/2009/04/video-blogging-week-on-viewpoint-day-4.html
> Day 5: 
> http://cityprod.blogspot.com/2009/04/video-blogging-week-on-viewpoint-day-5.html
> Day 6: 
> http://cityprod.blogspot.com/2009/04/video-blogging-week-on-viewpoint-day-6.html
> Day 7: 
> http://cityprod.blogspot.com/2009/04/video-blogging-week-on-viewpoint-day-7.html
> 
> Congratulations to everyone else who contributed to Video Blogging Week 2009.
> 
> Ian B
> http://cityprod.blogspot.com/
> 
> 
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: Mike Moon 
>   To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
>   Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2009 12:33 PM
>   Subject: [videoblogging] VideoBloggingWeek2009 Finale
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   Well, it's over. VideoBloggingWeek2009 has come to an end.
>   I wasn't nearly as prepared as I should have been, but I'm done.
>   http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2009/04/12/car-wash-confidential/
> 
>   Congrats to all those that tried or accomplished 7 videos in 7 days.
> 
>   Mike
>   RSS: http://feeds.feedburner.com/MoonEchoes
> 
> 
> 
>   
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Best Video Editing Software For H.264?

[Heath]

Sorry, I missed the MKVI am not sure how many editing programs actually 
support MKV files thoughso you may have to convert them regardless of which 
software you use...again I could be wrong but a quick google search did not 
show a lot of options in working with MKV natively...I checked premire, Vegas 
and Ulead's site and none of them supported MKV in native format.

I use a PC myself, so I understand wanting to stick with what you know, like I 
said for me, it's Vegas and QT pro for Windows and it works pretty well...

Heath
http://heathparks.com


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Davis Freeberg"  wrote:
>
> I took a look at Vegas, but unfortunately versions 6 & 7 don't support MKV.  
> I wasn't able to tell if their current version did, but I didn't see it 
> mentioned on their product page.  Ideally, I'd like to keep as much quality 
> as possible, but still have some kind of portability.  Quicktime is one 
> solution, but my digital eco-system isn't really setup for mac.  Being able 
> to burn to Blu-Ray would be another option, but I think I'd prefer storing my 
> files digital.  
> 
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Heath"  wrote:
> >
> > I use Sony Vegas, it will handle the h.264 video fine, and it will output 
> > to an mp4 ipod capatible filehowever, it does not "fast start" and it 
> > won't play on the Iphone via streaming.
> > 
> > How I do it is that I use Sony Vegas for the heavy lifting, editing, etc, 
> > and then output it to an uncompressed .avi file and then use Quicktime pro 
> > to render out to the Ipod/Iphone capatible format. It's an extra step 
> > butit's well worth it overall.  It looks good, it plays on ever device 
> > that is mp4 capable as well
> > 
> > As a side note, I think I have tried just about every other way to get an 
> > h.264 file without using quicktime and I have always been disapointed 
> > laterI finally just gave in on that and went with the QT pro option
> > 
> > Heath
> > http://heathparks.com
> > 
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Davis Freeberg"  wrote:
> > >
> > > The few video editing software programs I've used have been pretty basic 
> > > and disappointing.  Lots of bugs, limitations and crashing.  I'd like to 
> > > upgrade to something that lets me input h.264 files, edit them there and 
> > > then export into H.264/MKV.  Was wondering if anyone had an opinion on 
> > > the programs I should be looking at?  I'm a PC user, so that leaves out 
> > > Apple.  I'd like to find out which one is the best as well as the best 
> > > one that doesn't cost an arm or a leg.
> > >
> >
>

[videoblogging] Re: Best Video Editing Software For H.264?

[Heath]

I use Sony Vegas, it will handle the h.264 video fine, and it will output to an 
mp4 ipod capatible filehowever, it does not "fast start" and it won't play 
on the Iphone via streaming.

How I do it is that I use Sony Vegas for the heavy lifting, editing, etc, and 
then output it to an uncompressed .avi file and then use Quicktime pro to 
render out to the Ipod/Iphone capatible format. It's an extra step butit's 
well worth it overall.  It looks good, it plays on ever device that is mp4 
capable as well

As a side note, I think I have tried just about every other way to get an h.264 
file without using quicktime and I have always been disapointed laterI 
finally just gave in on that and went with the QT pro option

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Davis Freeberg"  wrote:
>
> The few video editing software programs I've used have been pretty basic and 
> disappointing.  Lots of bugs, limitations and crashing.  I'd like to upgrade 
> to something that lets me input h.264 files, edit them there and then export 
> into H.264/MKV.  Was wondering if anyone had an opinion on the programs I 
> should be looking at?  I'm a PC user, so that leaves out Apple.  I'd like to 
> find out which one is the best as well as the best one that doesn't cost an 
> arm or a leg.
>

[videoblogging] Re: Video Blogging Week: Day 1

[Heath]

My day 1 video, it's an "un-vlog" http://heathparks.com/blog1/?p=349

Heath Parks
http://heathparks.com/blog1

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Garfield"  wrote:
>
> Starting off Video Blogging Week 2009.
> 
> http://videobloggingweek2009.blogspot.com/
> 
> Here's my first:
> 
> Boston Pillowfight 2009
> 
> http://stevegarfield.blogs.com/videoblog/2009/04/boston-pillowfight-2009.html
> 
> In this video is tried out hte new iMovie 09 Comic Book theme feature.
> 
> Reply and post yours...
>

[videoblogging] Re: Videoblogging Week 2009

[Heath]

For this year's VBW I will be "un-vlogging"what is "un-vlogging" you 
ask...you will see...

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog1

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Josh Leo  wrote:
>
> Here is the info!
> 
> VBW is in it's 6th year!
> 
> http://videobloggingweek2009.blogspot.com/
> 
> April 5-11
> 
> Please join in!
> 
> -- 
> Josh Leo
> 
> www.JoshLeo.com
> www.ultrakawaii.com
> www.WanderingWestMichigan.com
> www.SlowLorisMedia.com
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: How patience made a good camera

[Heath]

I've been saying since I have been on this group, that "ease" will almost 
always trump everything else...

We are just a small group when compared to the world and for most people, they 
just want it to work and to be easyI mean let's face it, that's why Itunes 
and Ipods were/are so successful, why DVD's were adopted so quickly, etc...

ease, ease, easepeople just want it to work and not put a whole lot of 
effort into thinkingsad but true..

Heath 
http://heathparks.com/blog1

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert  wrote:
>
> Making an usual foray into pessimism, I have to say that we thought  
> the same thing about YouTube.
> Maybe it just needs more time.  Or maybe...
> "To predict the behavior of ordinary people in advance, you only have  
> to assume that they will always try to escape a disagreeable  
> situation with the smallest possible expenditure of intelligence." - 
> Nietzsche
> 
> On 20-Mar-09, at 10:10 AM, Jay dedman wrote:
> 
> Maybe the Flip is like the gateway drug. Gets people comfortable
> shooting/uploading...then they'll crave more control and quality.
> 
> Jay
> 
> -- 
> http://ryanishungry.com
> http://jaydedman.com
> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> 917 371 6790
> 
> 
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv/
> Creative Mobile Filmmaking
> Shot, edited and sent with my Nokia N93
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Hi-Def point and shoot camera's

[Heath]

I have been reading that lately more and more point and shoot digital camera's 
are starting to also record video in HD 720P  PC world has a nice round up on 
some point and shoot camera's and quite a few have HD video capabilities.

http://tech.msn.com/products/slideshow.aspx?cp-documentid=18090364

>From Kodak, to Cannon, to Sony, to Panasonic, etc...it's pretty exciting 
>really as flash storage comes down in price and increases capacity, it's 
>getting really affordable now.

I think it's great, especially for just good old fashion regular vlogging, have 
my camera, and take great looking pictures and video all at once.

Now once all those features get into a phone and we are really talking!  

But for now, I think it's really cool and I see a new camera purchase in my 
future!

Heath
http://heathparks.com

[videoblogging] Re: Meet the elite!

[Heath]

Anything that helps independent creators and/or people who are trying to 
leverage this new medium into something else, I say great!!  As we know there 
are some really great people out there who are doing some good work and have 
worked hard to achive the success they have.

Me, I will just continue to do my thing and not worry about all thatI vlog 
because I can

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert  wrote:
>
> Here's the kind of post that would have induced a feeding frenzy back  
> in the good old bad old days here on the group.  Like throwing an  
> underling to the piranhas.  In the spirit of that, I give you:
> 
> The International Academy of Web Television
> http://www.iawtv.org/
> 
> Just launched last week, though no one mentioned it here.
> 
> Members are voting on The Streamys awards which Josh Cohen announced  
> a while ago here.  The Academy was created by a cartel of the main  
> web video news sites: Tilzy.tv, Tubefilter and NewTeeVee.
> 
> They've published their inaugural membership list, featuring some of  
> our friends from the group.  Most of those you'd expect, who have  
> popular shows, know a lot of people, do the social media thing well,  
> and connect in real life in the right circles at meetups in NY, SF or  
> LA (But not Scoble or Feldman or Ze Frank).  Not just performers and  
> show producers, but executives and talent agents.
> 
> I'm not quite sure why the limit on numbers - other Academies have  
> hundreds or thousands of members, and there are quite a few people  
> I'd want to see on the list who aren't there, because they're either  
> not commercial enough or not well enough connected - even though they  
> have strong and interesting voices and ideas about web television and  
> independent production.  That said, I'm particularly glad to see W&S  
> in there.  Although I clearly remember Quirk saying that awards were  
> pretentious and pointless, and belong on the wall of real estate  
> offices, so I hope you're not going to vote in the Streamys.  (I  
> nominated you).
> 
> And so much for "International" - as far as I can see, the only even  
> vaguely non-US representation there is Daily Motion's US  
> representative and RDF television's US executive.  Not even anybody  
> from any other English speaking countries?  That's just lazy - I  
> wouldn't be so bothered by it if it wasn't called the "International  
> Academy of Web Television".  If you're going to call it that, you've  
> got to go out of your way to get some representation from other  
> countries, on more than a token level.
> 
> Anyway, now the media has an official organisation to talk to when  
> they do stories about Web TV.  So if the rest of us want to have a  
> voice in media discussion of web video (its present state and its  
> future), we'd better follow Jeffrey's lead and organize ourselves.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
>

[videoblogging] Re: new Wordpress Video plugin

[Heath]

Not for the meek indeed...or the average video blogger either

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adam Warner  
wrote:
>
> ...very cool, and not for the meek "In addition to Web servers 
for WordPress MU , it requires at least one file server and one 
dedicated video transcoder. 
> Considerable amount of PHP coding and system administration skills 
are required to install, customize and deploy this plugin."
> 
>  
> Speaking of MU and BuddyPress, I've been working with MU for a few 
years, but I just started a community based on MU and BP. I wonder if 
I might integrate a video solution someday?
> 
> You can find it here http://mybodypart.org
>  
> 
> Adam W. Warner
>  
> 
>  
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Jay dedman 
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 1:28:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] new Wordpress Video plugin
> 
> 
> > Just as there's Ning.com as an open version of Facebook, perhaps 
this
> > might be the open version of Youtube.
> 
> Ning is cool because it's so easy to create your own social
> networkbut as far as I can tell, Ning owns the actual site as 
long
> as you keep it in existence. With platforms like Wordpress.org, you
> take on the burden of hosting...but you control everything.
> 
> Buddypress.org is WP's version of an open source Facebook.
> 
> Jay
> 
> -- 
> http://ryanishungry .com
> http://jaydedman. com
> 917 371 6790
> 
>
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Low...low...low budget filmmaking

[Heath]

Personaly I don't think you have to sacrifice one for the otherI 
have a couple of long term projects that I want to do and one I am 
getting ready to start, but I think I can always find some time to 
post a little snippett here and there

I think far to often, we as artists feel like everything we do has to 
be worthy of the time we put into it...or I guess I should say our 
percieved notion of what is "worthy" or "good"

It's a struggle I had oftendo I only do a few good pieces or a 
bunch of "crap"at the end of the day, for meI do something 
when the mood strikes me, whatever that may beand I will continue 
to work on bigger projects as time allows...

As I have saidthey are all part of the story that I am telling

But what works for me is potato's to someone else  :-)

Heath
http://heathparks.com/blog1


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert  wrote:
>
> It depends on how you define "spare time".  Whether you look at in  
> terms of a few hours in the evenings and at weekends, or all those  
> hours aggregated over many months or years, dedicated to one 
project.
> 
> I have no idea how Chris Marker got funding back then - although I  
> suspect that the French had good grants back in the 60s, 70s and  
> 80s.  It he must have taken a long time to work on it.  Years, I'd  
> have thought.  Perhaps alongside an unrelated paying job.  In the  
> five years leading up to Sans Soleil's release in 1983, he made 
two  
> short films, one in 1978 and one in 1981.
> 
> One of the drawbacks of social media is the pressure to keep  
> presenting work regularly - that publishing regularly is maybe 
more  
> important than time spent writing/producing/whatever.  And it  
> fragments your spare time - means you produce a lot of little 
pieces,  
> spending a couple of hours on each, and stops you dedicating all 
that  
> time to a single piece of work that might not be able to be 
published  
> for months or years.
> 
> It inspires a curious lack of confidence, that your work might not 
be  
> good enough to be seen, read or heard amid all the noise and 
roaring  
> torrent of online media, so it's more important to shout louder 
and  
> more often.  If you haven't published anything on your blog for 
six  
> months, everybody thinks you've given up or died.  People actually  
> delete their whole blogs and back catalogue because they're  
> frustrated that they haven't published anything for a few months, 
and  
> they think they're out of the game.  It's insane.
> 
> As a result, a lot of the films made and published online don't 
feel  
> like they've had lots of time put into them.  That doesn't  
> necessarily make them weaker - there's a lot of great stuff that  
> comes from people working quickly or observing things in the 
moment.   
> But I notice this tendency to ephemerality everywhere.  Compared 
to  
> work published in other media or shown in exhibitions, there's 
less  
> work online that's obviously had a lot of time and thought and  
> dedication poured into it, that has the self-confidence to say "I  
> deserve all the time spent on me"  - and when you see something 
that  
> has, it often stands out.
> 
> I'm spending a year working on one project, now - because I'd 
rather  
> aggregate my limited spare time in pursuit of doing one project 
that  
> excites me than I would spend one evening a week hurriedly trying 
to  
> publish several personal videoblog posts that I don't care so much  
> about but which I'm doing because I feel I should.  I don't know 
if  
> it'll end up being any good - that's the risk - but it's the way I  
> want to use my 'spare time' this year, and at the end of it I hope  
> I'll feel like it's been worth it.
> 
> That said, until now I haven't had a larger project I wanted to 
work  
> on, and it's been great to be able to use my blog to keep 
practicing  
> and working regularly and experimenting with lots of different 
things  
> - and had I not done that, I wouldn't now be doing this other thing.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
> On 16-Feb-09, at 7:52 AM, Brook Hinton wrote:
> 
> The time necessary to create significant/valuable/meaningful long  
> form work,
> and in many cases even short form work, is why, for better or 
worse,  
> money
> is often necessarily part of the sustainability equation for media  
> artists
> and documentarians even in this age of ultra low cost tools and diy
> distribution via the web.
> I don't think Chris Marker made "Sans Soleil" in his &quo

[videoblogging] Re: Josh Leo's site

[Heath]

when I created my wordpress site, I created a mirror site on 
wordpress.com and I cross post everything there as well...so if 
something does happen, I have a backup to work with in addtion to the 
other backups I do.I'm anal.....

Heath

http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David King  
wrote:
>
> My web hoster actually does most of that for me (the backups, 
rollbacks,
> etc). I do my own updates to wordpress, customizations, etc - but 
they do
> everything else. But then, it's a small, service-oriented web 
hoster shop
> primarly for library-related blogs and websites (how's that for a 
niche
> market?). If I have a server type question or prob, I just email or 
IM and
> it gets fixed, pronto.
> 
> I'm very spoiled.
> 
> David Lee King
> davidleeking.com - blog
> davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog
> twitter | skype: davidleeking
> 
> 
> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Mike Meiser wrote:
> 
> > Sorry Markus,
> > Everyone fears coming home from vacation to find their website 
burned down.
> >
> > Maybe you can hire a website security company, buy some website 
insurance
> > or
> > find a website sitter.
> >
> > Seriously though, analogies are not only fun, but how's the 
following for a
> > business idea.
> >
> > A company that you give FTP or sFTP access to your website.
> >
> > It not only backs up everything, and tracks every single change 
through a
> > web based versioning control system, but can automatic roll back 
and even
> > flags malicious changes.
> >
> > Make it general consumer friendly.
> >
> > Give it a nice "web 2.0" interface.
> >
> > Sell it to self hosters regardless of whom they're hosting with as
> > "insurance, security, and backup".
> >
> > This not only can be a transparent service instead of bogging 
down would be
> > DIY types with the need to buy your designs or run their workflow 
through
> > you or use you as a host.
> >
> > But it will let the end user go crazy customizing their code, 
playing with
> > open source, using whatever host provider they want.   Giving 
them true
> > *fredom to tinker*... now that they now have a saftey net.
> >
> > websaftey.net, it's actually available.
> >
> >
> > Does something similar already exist?
> >
> >
> > Now build on it... add in security analysis...
> >
> > ie. making sure permissions are correct on all your files...
> >
> > i.e. giving you status on wether your software installed on your 
server is
> > up to date
> >
> >
> >
> > Maybe... if the technical requirements aren't to bad it could 
even install
> > certain open source packages automatically regardless of hosting 
provider.
> >
> > What about the ability to switch hosts?
> >
> > Or mirror a website on a different domain with the click of a 
button?
> >
> > The ability to edit or upgrade or test a service and then roll it 
to the
> > users main site.
> >
> >
> >
> > Perhaps this webservice could orient the market in a different 
way. Perhaps
> > it could focus on a particular niche say video, customizing it's 
services
> > for videobloggers...i.e installing wordpress themes vPip, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > At it's core the backup and versioning is more then enough to 
sell to every
> > web2.0 person out there for $5 - $10 a month and make mondo 
money, but the
> > possibilities on where it can go from there are endless.
> >
> > The key is you're doing the same thing to hosting providers as so 
caled
> > "web2.0" services like gmail have done to Outlook, Eudora and 
other email
> > desktop clients.
> >
> > You're moving key services from the hosting providers into 
the "cloud" as
> > services and thus reducing the dependancy on hosting companies 
proprietary
> > features. In a sense your comoditizing the hosting provider the 
way the web
> > is commoditizing the Microsoft OS, Microsoft Office, Outlook, 
Word, Excell,
> > etc.
> >
> > You could go on to make this a gateway and a security net for not 
so tech
> > savy people so they can try out open source packages regardless of
> > different
> > hosting providers.
> >
> > Perhaps one day... if you base this webservice on open source and 
work on
> > building standards everyone from drupal to wordpress will work 
toward you
> > to
> > create a sort of web based "package manager" for the internet.
> >
> > In this way your

[videoblogging] Re: Josh Leo's site

[Heath]

Wellit could also be that sometimes with an update to 
Wordpress...not everything works right, plugin's that worked before 
suddenly do not, or some random combination of things cause an 
issue...so it's not just as simple as keeping the site up to date 
with the current software

So it's not always so simple

Heath

http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Meiser  wrote:
>
> To use your car analogy most people simply take it to the dealer for
> maintence.
> There is no dealer for self hosting. Dreamhost nor any other 
provide that
> sort of support.  That type of structure does not exist.
> 
> Most people are not technically literate enough to manage the 
constant
> stream of upgrades. I myself while technically capable, cut a hard 
edge on
> maintence issues. If I go on vacation for a month, I simply don't 
want to
> worry about it. And a month of ignoring it is all it takes... now 
multiply
> that by the rest of your life. Most people underestimate how much 
the long
> term maintence costs are while underestimating their own capactity 
to handle
> that constant maintence.
> 
> These people should simply NOT be self hosting... unless they use
> blogger.com which requires no maintence.
> 
> It's that simple.
> 
> -Mike
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 6:41 PM, David Howell  wrote:
> 
> > I'm sorry but the Wordpress site owners that are having their 
sites
> > hacked are the same people that buy a car and expect to never 
have to
> > change the oil in it.
> >
> > Running a self-hosted site means being able to manage one as 
well. If
> > you don't want to manage it, then you use sites like Blogger. 
Blogger
> > is great for that. No frills. No muss. No fuss. No extras.
> >
> > If you dont want to manage it yourself, you hire people like me 
that
> > will not only design and build it but manage it as well. If you 
want
> > to do it all yourself, please read the manual, secure it and keep 
it
> > up do date with patches. Your unsecured site causes problems for 
everyone.
> >
> > If you dont change the oil in your car, dont cry when it's 
eventually
> > sitting dead on the side of the road.
> >
> > David Howell
> > http://www.davidhowellstudios.com
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Meiser
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Sad to hear. :(
> > > I'm assuming he was running wordpress?
> > >
> > > I've seen way to many wordpress blogs hacked. The problem is 
just
> > maintence,
> > > you have to keep wordpress constantly up to date to patch 
security
> > holes. If
> > > you don't it will inevitably get hacked. Same goes for all 
server
> > side open
> > > source.
> > >
> > > Many times I've wanted to redo my blogger.com blog in 
wordpress, indeed
> > > wordpress is simply better, but the truth is blogger.com is
> > virtually hack
> > > proof since there's absolutely no server side code running. 
It's all
> > handled
> > > by blogger.com and written to the server via sftp.  I've really 
come to
> > > appreciate this rock solid security and ZERO maintenance, and 
to be
> > honest
> > > it's the primary reason I simply recommend blogger over 
wordpress to
> > anyone
> > > who wants to self host on their own domain. The exception being 
if
> > they're a
> > > developer and already running code on their server, in which 
case
> > they're
> > > probably aware enough of the maintenance issues to run 
wordpress.
> > >
> > > Lately I've been doing a lot of work in the bike industry and it
> > seems the
> > > entire industry from shop owners, to racers to bike makers runs 
almost
> > > exclusively on a blogspot hosted ecosystem.  It simply works.
> > >
> > > P.S. a good auto-backup system or version control system for 
your
> > blog is a
> > > MUST if you run wordpress. A lot of hosting providers include 
this
> > stock.
> > >
> > > -Mike
> > > mmeiser.com/blog
> > > flickr.com/photos/mmeiser2
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Steve Watkins  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Looking back a page or 2 on his twitter history, I think the 
site got
> > > > hacked.
> > > >
> > > > http://twitter.com/joshleo
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > > Steve
> > > >
> > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David King 

> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyone know what happened to josh Leo's site (joshleo.com)? 
It looks
> > > > > like it is gone ... & I really like his videos!
> > > > >
> > > > > Just curious
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Is Obama pro copryright? Are we screwed?

[Heath]

I work for a Bank, I think everyday about my job being gone the next 
day.of course we are screwed when it comes to that...but in 
regards to this "hobby" I have, I still think about things like 
copyright law and how it affects us a vloggers.....

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, John Coffey 
 wrote:
>
> I think we're screwed with many more things higher on the list than 
a copyright law. Health care, economy, energy...etc etc etc.
> 
> Jimmy CraicHead TV Video Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and 
Cocktails www.jchtv.com
> 
> 
> --- On Thu, 2/5/09, Heath  wrote:
> 
> > From: Heath 
> > Subject: [videoblogging] Is Obama pro copryright?  Are we screwed?
> > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Thursday, February 5, 2009, 8:09 AM
> > Well, in case anyone was wondering where our new president
> > stood on 
> > copyright laws and how best to change themlook no
> > further...
> > 
> > Understand this is a big deal, a really big deal, this was
> > they guy 
> > who got the court to agree that putting your songs on your
> > computer 
> > and "making them availible" on a peer to peer
> > network violated the 
> > law, yes that was overturned but now this guy is in the
> > Justice 
> > Department...
> > 
> > Change we can believe in?.time will tell...
> > 
> > 
http://tech.yahoo.com/news/cnet/20090205/tc_cnet/83011357831015738138
> > 
> > "Obama's DOJ pick is RIAA lawyer who killed
> > Grokster" 
> > 
> > - President Obama is continuing to fill the senior ranks of
> > the U.S. 
> > Department of Justice with the copyright industry's
> > favorite lawyers. 
> > 
> > Donald Verrilli announced Wednesday that he had been named
> > associate 
> > deputy attorney general. Verrilli is the lawyer who pulled
> > the plug 
> > on Grokster, sued Google on behalf of Viacom, and
> > represented the 
> > Recording Industry Association of America against a
> > Minnesota woman 
> > named Jammie Thomas who's accused of illicit file
> > sharing. 
> > 
> > This follows a string of other pro-copyright industry picks
> > that 
> > Obama has made. Last month, there was Obama's selection
> > last month of 
> > a top RIAA lawyer--currently squaring off in court with
> > Harvard 
> > University's Berkman Center--to be third-in-command at
> > the Justice 
> > Department. 
> > 
> > Vice President Joe Biden has long been an ally of the
> > recording 
> > industry, urging the criminal prosecutions of
> > copyright-infringing 
> > peer-to-peer users and trying to create a new federal
> > felony 
> > involving playing unauthorized music. And another senior
> > Justice 
> > Department post has gone to the top antipiracy enforcer for
> > the 
> > Business Software Alliance, a strong supporter of the
> > Digital 
> > Millennium Copyright Act's anti-circumvention rules. 
> > 
> > Obama's latest choice, Verrilli, is a senior litigator
> > in the 
> > Washington, D.C. offices of the Jenner & Block law
> > firm. 
> > 
> > In technology circles, he's probably best known for
> > arguing the 
> > Minnesota case called Capitol v. Thomas. In that case, the
> > RIAA 
> > convinced the judge to accept jury instructions saying that
> > 
> > the "making copyrighted sound recordings available for
> > electronic 
> > distribution on a peer-to-peer network" violated the
> > law, even if 
> > none had actually been transferred. 
> > 
> > Verrilli won the first round, with a federal jury saying in
> > October 
> > 2007 that Thomas had to pay $220,000. But then the judge
> > threw out 
> > the verdict, concluding the jury instructions he approved
> > were 
> > misleading; the RIAA is hoping to hold on to the initial
> > verdict and 
> > is currently appealing. 
> > 
> > One reason why this case is especially relevant to
> > Verrilli's new job 
> > is that the Justice Department intervened in the Thomas
> > case on 
> > behalf of the RIAA. 
> > 
> > That has already caused some tech lobbyists to wonder
> > privately about 
> > whether or not Verrilli will recuse himself from matters
> > that affect 
> > their former clients. Another example of a relevant case
> > involves the 
> > Supreme Court asking the Justice Department for input on a
> > case 
> &g

[videoblogging] Is Obama pro copryright? Are we screwed?

[Heath]

d labels. 

During the campaign, when CNET News asked Obama for his views on 
copyright, he replied: "As policymakers, we are in a constant process 
of examining our laws to ensure that the protections we place on 
intellectual property are sufficient to encourage invention without 
hindering innovation that builds on previous work or unfairly 
limiting consumers from using the goods they purchase in a way that 
is fair to creators." 

That was, unfortunately, rather vague. Now it's a bit more clear 
where he stands.

Heath
http://heathparks.com

[videoblogging] Re: Yes We Can

[Heath]

Why anyone would want YouTube "fame" is beyond memost of the 
comments on YT sicken me, I'd rather do my thing and have a close 
circle of friends anyday of the weekall else is vanity...someone 
once told me...  :-)

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert  wrote:
>
> As for the feed autodiscover, that's a glitch - I contacted them  
> about that.  You've got to expect things like that on the first 
day.   
> Also, they don't have any videos up yet, so that might explain why  
> it's not been found yet.
> 
> 
> I think comments are overrated, especially for politics.  They 
didn't  
> have comments enabled on the Obama campaign blog, either.  If I 
were  
> them, I wouldn't have open comments.  It would quickly fill up 
with  
> hate and anonymous trolls, and put off people who don't hate.
> You don't want that on the WhiteHouse.gov site
> They do have comments enabled on youtube.com/whitehouse
> I don't have comments enabled on my youtube videos
> This is the first page of comments from the video of his Inaugural  
> address, when I looked there, which I think say it all.
> These comments are inappropriate for the White House site.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daryl060761
> You bitter smartasses that can't deal with Barack Obama being  
> president can go ask George Bush if he'll let you move into his  
> exclusive gated community in Texas.
> 
> PreyTheSun
> All I know is that our four so called father are turning over in  
> their graves right now because of this. His very name is 
unacceptable.
> 
> HearTalent
> type mark nikollaj new song sexy in the search bar
> 
> SwornReaper
> fuck that! he is not even natural born citizen. This country is  
> funken up with blacks everywhere. Ask yourself, did George  
> Washington fight this country for NegroesWhat were they even  
> brought here forIs this even their land???
> 
> chitownbound
> and YES BUSH DID give tax-cuts to the rich for 8 years.YES HE DID!!!
> 
> PreyTheSun
> your fucking clown shoes yourself, chitownbound
> 
> SamirMuaremi
> Agree with HarryPuntCunnington .
> 
> HarryPuntCunnington
> One of the most important events of the last century, and someone  
> can't keep a camera steady. . .
> 
> jimitl5
> "I wish Bush was still in office."
> I am going to miss him also. I am going to miss all the good 
laughs  
> from all his screw ups with language. Strategery! LOL!!!
> 
> obamatownmassacre
> Yes, we can spend $200 MILLION dollars on an inauguration while 
the  
> US is facing financial collapse. YES WE CAN!!!
> 
> chitownbound
> these obama h8ters are comical.
> 
> svetlity
> fuck you ! Go Obama !!
> 
> thebestkpm
> i wait that the thinks changes, really not absolutely but i have  
> faith in him!!
> 
> 
> On 21-Jan-09, at 3:15 AM, Jan McLaughlin wrote:
> 
> And comments are not enabled in the White House blog :(
> 
> They're headed in the right direction, tho. That's for sure.
> 
> Jan
> 
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Christian Wach  
>  wrote:
>  >
>  > On 21 Jan 2009, at 02:42, Rupert wrote:
>  >
>  >> the president is a weekly videoblogger.
>  >>
>  >> watched the whole thing this morning on a laptop, full screen, 
via
>  >> wifi, live.
>  >> not so long ago, all this was science fiction.
>  >
>  > noble intentions for sure - unfortunately, the auto-discovery 
feed
>  > link doesn't work and there are no feeds listed on the RSS page.
>  >
>  > *sigh*
>  >
>  >
>  > 
>  >
>  > Yahoo! Groups Links
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
> 
> -- 
> Jan McLaughlin
> Production Sound Mixer
> air = 862-571-5334
> aim = janofsound
> skype = janmclaughlin
> 
> 
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv/
> Creative Mobile Filmmaking
> Shot, edited and sent with my Nokia N93
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Screen capture software?

[Heath]

I would concur with Michael about Camstudio.  I use it and it's 
really easy to use and learn.

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Verdi" 
 wrote:
>
> If you are using windows, then camstudio.org is great and free. If 
you
> are on a mac, I love iShowU from shinywhitebox.com ($20).
> - Verdi
> 
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Susan  wrote:
> > Hi there!
> >
> > I wanted to ask the videoblogging collective what your favorite 
(and
> > perferably free?) screen capture software is. I'm talking about to
> > teach someone how to perform a function on a desktop. Audio is 
cool,
> > but not necessary; I can add audio afterwards.
> >
> > Thoughts?  Thanks!
> > Susan
> > http://vlog.kitykity.com
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://michaelverdi.com
>

[videoblogging] Re: Making the most of h.264

[Heath]

Ok, that was not much of a tutoralalso he was using the pro
version and the version you have you can not mess with the presets for
the mainconcept.mp4.  Although with the version you do have, you can
create the mainconcept.mp4 version and have it also be 640x480.  When
you select "make movie", for your project, select the "advanced
render" tab and from there you can select the mainconcept.mp4  Like I
said it does make an Ipod friendly version with that, it just won't
fast start on the webemail me and I can make you some screenshots,
probably after Christmas thoughbut I can help you... but if you
use the settings from my previous email, that should make a pretty
nice looking .264 video out of Quicktime pro

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "RatbagMedia" 
wrote:
>
> 
> Steve Watkins writes:
> > What format do you encode to presently? 
> 
> 
> Thanks Steve..I experimented with *Sony AVC* and created a template to
> engineer that. But I'm experimenting where I can.
> 
> So I got myself Quicktime Pro and started to work that into my
> protocols and then this issue came up in regard to export/import
settings.
> 
> Heath writes:
> >Like I said, I have been using Vegas, since I started, 3 years ago. I
> >use the pro version now, so I do have quite a bit of knowledge on
> >this.makes me realize, I should do a screencast on Vegas
> >compression settings
> 
> Yes you should as there are many confusions available on the web in 
> regard to Vegas settings.
> 
> One on compression for Vegas is here:
> http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Hl_BM67VuRw&eurl
> Rendering AVC/H.264 Within Sony Vegas
> 
> My son is needing of  video compression too and we've started to have
> these debates about what protocols to use. So we swap notes and the
> note pile is getting higher  everyday.
> 
> dave riley
>

[videoblogging] Re: Making the most of h.264

[Heath]

I use Sony Vegas, have since I started vlogging, there are a couple of
versions of Vegas that will allow you to create an Ipod friendly
format straight from Vegas...Platinum is one of them, I believethe
trouble with that option though, is that it will not fast start, so
for the web it's useless.  And I am not sure if it will work on the
iphone, but it will play in an Ipod, etc.  Another option is
this...(assuming you really want an .264 video file)

Export out to an avi file, but make it custom, go under "Advanced
Render", select the .avi file, select the "NTSC DV" and then select
"Custom", when that comes up, select the video tab and change the
field order to "none progessive scan", then in the template tab at the
top, rename the "NTSC DV" to something like "New NTSC DV", then hit
the save button and then hit ok.  Then you can render out to that
formatit's still compressing it, but it will not be noticable,
(usually, I will get back to that later).  as an fyi the reason why
you want to select progressive scan is that for video on the web or
for that matter for LCD's etc, it will look better once you convert it
again.

Ok, once you have created the .avi file with the above specs, if you
have Quicktime pro, you can then select movie to ipod and you will be
good to gothere are still some issues with that, like you can do
any presets, etc, but you can create an mp4 file and customize it. 
Freevlog can explain that pretty well.  (www.freevlog.com) look for
the tuturials


If any of this is a bit confusing, feel free to email me. 
heathparks[at]msn[dot]com

Like I said, I have been using Vegas, since I started, 3 years ago.  I
use the pro version now, so I do have quite a bit of knowledge on
this.makes me realize, I should do a screencast on Vegas
compression settings

Heath
http://heathparks.com


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Verdi"
 wrote:
>
> You don't want to render your file twice if possible. When you edit in
> Sony Vegas you want to edit in the codec you shot, i.e. DV. Then
> export it from Vegas in that same codec (effectively making an exact
> copy) and then compress it using H.264.
> 
> If you are working with HD footage you probably have to transcode it
> before editing. I use a Mac and shoot in HDV. I hate editing HDV so I
> transcode it on the fly to the Apple Intermediate Codec when I capture
> it in FCP. I haven't tried editing AVCHD but from my understanding
> it's not great for editing either. I don't know what the options are
> in Vegas but transcoding in FCP is done at such a high bit rate with a
> great codec that it's essentially lossless (it's not actually lossless
> but the differences must be minuscule). Either way, when I'm done
> editing, I export in the codec that I used for editing (I archive
> those files on my hard drive and then later DVDs - I have 4 spindles
> of discs laying around) before compressing with H.264.
> 
> You don't have to have QuickTime Pro to compress with H.264 but I
> don't the options for Windows users. Maybe some of them will jump in
> here.
> 
> - Verdi
> 
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 7:45 AM, RatbagMedia  wrote:
> > I own up to a lot of confusion.
> >
> > When you follow the dictates of various videoblogging expertise the
> > h.264 codec is a standard recommendation. Not h.263 or just MPEG.4 but
> > it has to be the Real McCoy.
> >
> > Assuming that's correct I have a couple of questions:
> >
> > (1) Can a file only be rendered to h.264 by using QuickTime Pro?
> >
> > (2) Since I edit in Sony Vegas (Platinum 9.0)I have to render my video
> > file  in SV first  BEFORE processing it in QuickTime. So  what is the
> > best format to render the file in Sony Vegas (or some other video
> > editor) before importing it into Quicktime for exporting as .mov?
> >
> > (3) Mac snobbery aside, since I render a file  twice, this seems a lot
> > of extra effort and lot more time for the sake of image quality and
> > iTunes download options.
> >
> > dave riley
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://michaelverdi.com
>

[videoblogging] 3 years of vlogging

[Heath]

3 years ago today, I started vlogging...it's been a wild ride you can
check out my post about it here!

http://heathparks.com/blog1/?p=334

Heath
http://heathparks.com

[videoblogging] ISP's becoming the enforcement arm of the RIAA?

[Heath]

Another example of how important net neturality isand how much 
harder it's becomeing for the net to remain netural.  From CNET

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/cnet/20081219/tc_cnet/8301102331012691493

The scary thing for us is thishow much longer till they start 
limiting usdon't think they won't try



- The music industry's highly controversial strategy of suing 
customers for file sharing has mostly ended. 

The Recording Industry Association of America said Friday that it no 
longer plans to wage a legal assault against people who it suspects 
of pirating digital music files. What the RIAA should have said, 
though, is that it won't go after most people who illegally file 
share. My music industry sources say that the RIAA will continue to 
file lawsuits against the most egregious offenders--the person 
who "downloads 5,000 or 6,000 songs a month is still going to get 
sued," a source at a major record company told me. 

The strategy of suing music fans has long been criticized by artists, 
consumers, and even some record-label executives. Critics have said 
it alienates music buyers and more importantly has been ineffectual. 
Now, the music industry has a new form of protection: Internet 
service providers. 

According to a story in The Wall Street Journal (subscription 
required), which broke the news about the RIAA's new strategy, 
unidentified Internet service providers have agreed to "reduce the 
service," to chronic file-sharers. Exactly what a reduction of 
service may include isn't specified, but likely means ISPs will limit 
a user's bandwidth, a practice known as throttling. 

The way the new enforcement system will work is that the RIAA will 
alert an ISP that a customer appears to be file sharing. The ISP will 
then notify the person that he or she appears to be file sharing. If 
the behavior by the customer doesn't change, then more e-mails will 
be sent. If the customer ignores these e-mails, then the ISP may 
choose to reduce service. If all else fails, they can choose to 
discontinue service. 

Under the plan, which was brokered by New York State Attorney General 
Andrew Cuomo, the music industry will not know the customer's 
identity. I doubt this will be enough to prevent some Internet rights 
groups from complaining. The fact of the matter is that ISPs have now 
gone into the enforcement business, and this has always been one of 
the greatest fears of those who have wanted ISPs to remain neutral. 

Heath
http://heathparks.com

[videoblogging] Re: Google wants a "fast track" for it's content from Internet Providers

[Heath]

Good, I'm glad it's not truebut I have to tell you the skeptic in 
me, still wonders.I mean they are placing their servers to "help" 
the broadband providers according to the corrected reportsI mean 
they are just doing this out of their own goodwill?  Nobody, 
espceially compines does something for nothing

Regardless we must be vigilant to ensure that we don't lose the 
principal of net neturaltaility

we now return you to your reguarlly scheduled programing..

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert  wrote:
>
> Sounds like a fittingly overblown made-up scare story to celebrate  
> the anniversary of Murdoch buying the WSJ.  Bye, bye Journalism.   
> Hello bullshit.
> 
> His namesake, alas
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
> On 15-Dec-08, at 6:52 AM, Jay dedman wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Jay dedman   
> wrote:
>  > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Heath  wrote:
>  >> And here I thought their mantra was "do no evil", Umm Net 
Neturality
>  >> anyone? Sooner or later this will happen and I fear it will be 
the
>  >> death knell for the little guy
>  >> http://tech.yahoo.com/news/nm/20081215/tc_nm/us_google
> 
>  From Jay Rosen:
> "Okay, here's the Google rep slamming the Wall Street Journal story
> http://is.gd/bJGj and Lessig calling it a fairy tale
> http://is.gd/bLN7";
> 
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Google wants a "fast track" for it's content from Internet Providers

[Heath]

And here I thought their mantra was "do no evil", Umm Net Neturality 
anyone?  Sooner or later this will happen and I fear it will be the 
death knell for the little guy

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/nm/20081215/tc_nm/us_google

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - Google Inc has approached Internet carriers 
with a proposal to create a "fast lane" for its own content, 
countering its previously stance of equal network access for all 
content providers, The Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday.

One major cable operator in talks with Google said it has been 
reluctant to forge a deal because of concerns it might violate 
Federal Communications Commission guidelines on network neutrality, 
the newspaper said in its electronic edition.

Cable and phone companies that operate the data pipelines are 
supposed to treat all traffic the same.

Google's proposal, called OpenEdge, would place Google servers 
directly within the network of the service providers, the newspaper 
said.

The setup would accelerate Google's service for users, the newspaper 
said.

Google could not be immediately reached for comment.

The Wall Street Journal said that when asked about OpenEdge, Google 
said other companies could strike similar deals if they desired.

Heath
http://heathparks.com

[videoblogging] Re: Does the "Blog" format work for Vlogging anymore?

[Heath]

I have enjoyed the discussion as wellit's interesting to see how 
things have evolved and continue to evolveand how at the end of 
the day one truth remains.do what makes you happyI mean we 
have all these means to communicate now, to share stories, etc...but 
at the end of the day, you just gotta enjoy what you are doingand 
one size never fits allwhich is so great, you know.  It's what I 
love about the web and the communities that developI love it and 
I love having discussions, seeing things from a different 
perspective

Now if I could just find that perfect theme....

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins"  
wrote:
>
> Great discussion. 
> 
> It takes me back to several different topics I used to rant on 
about here. Several projects I 
> always wanted to do but, as usual, never really got started on.
> 
> I like to think about a CMS that can show its content through a 
variety of flash front ends. 
> The useful bits of blogging, social networking, community, 
communication, and decent 
> presentation of videos and other content, but with a much smoother 
interface and experience 
> than we are typically used to. And no walled garden approach. And 
no need to be a techie.
> 
> Easy for me to say, obviously much harder to achieve. Im still up 
for trying, the fuel I need is 
> people being continually passionate and talkative about such 
things, so that I keep faith that 
> there is reason to bother trying.
> 
> Anyway I will avoid going into further detail so this doesnt turn 
into one of my bloated posts 
> of yesteryear, I'm sure I'll add further thoughts later.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Steve Elbows
>

[videoblogging] Re: Does the "Blog" format work for Vlogging anymore?

[Heath]

Actually the only thing I use RSS for is for downloading my podcasts, 
I don't use RSS either, I was just asking for those that do...

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Ron Watson  wrote:
>
> > g through their reader, than why have a site at all then?
> >
> > As far as having all of your video's on Blip etc, well I know for 
me,
> > that Blip's Showplayer does not show all of my stuff it only goes
> > back about a year, so you are missing anything older...but that is
> > neither here nor there...
> 
> Nobody but you guys are viewing through your reader.
> 
> Nobody is going to mefeedia.
> 
> The feed services like feedburner and mefeedia are awesome for 
giving  
> a large footprint, but for the masses they are not destinations.
> 
> The only people who go there and use feed readers are geeks. 
Regular  
> people don't know what an RSS feed is let alone how to use and 
manage  
> one. If FF did not automagically parse them they'd think it was a  
> broken link.
> 
> I use RSS feeds to push my vids out there and to get them exposure 
so  
> I can get hits on search engines. Mefeedia and Feedburner are 
great  
> for creating a large footprint. They are for the people on this 
list.
> 
> But there are very few people who view stuff on RSS feeds. Just 
the  
> busy geeks like yourselves.
> 
> I exempt myself from this statement, as I don't use feeds, although 
I  
> probably would if I had the bandwidth available to watch videos.
> 
> I gobble up my 5 GB shuffling files around the sites that I am  
> developing.
> 
> > So I go back to my first statement and ask, Is RSS in effect part 
of
> > the problem? Is it so easy now to just watch that we are becoming
> > passive? That we no longer care about the communication or the
> > connections that can develop?
> 
> Yes, they are part of the problem. The people on this list are 
busy,  
> busy, and we live in our own little world.
> 
> If I don't follow a link from a post here, I don't see it.
> 
> There needs to be a gathering place with an application that can 
make  
> the people on this list happy AND reach the public.
> 
> Hasn't happened yet.
> 
> We need to start trying to put things together as a group if we're  
> going to  get any kind of serious visibility.
> 
> Hasn't happened yet.
> 
> peace,
> Ron Watson
> http://k9disc.blip.tv
> http://k9disc.com
> http://discdogradio.com
> http://pawsitivevybe.com
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 11, 2008, at 3:46 PM, Heath wrote:
> 
> > So it seems that by having an RSS feed we are actually taking away
> > from the communial side of blogging/vlogging?
> >
> > I mean if there is no reason to ever go to a site because 
everyone is
> > reading through their reader, than why have a site at all then?
> >
> > As far as having all of your video's on Blip etc, well I know for 
me,
> > that Blip's Showplayer does not show all of my stuff it only goes
> > back about a year, so you are missing anything older...but that is
> > neither here nor there...
> >
> > So I go back to my first statement and ask, Is RSS in effect part 
of
> > the problem? Is it so easy now to just watch that we are becoming
> > passive? That we no longer care about the communication or the
> > connections that can develop?
> >
> > Heath
> > http://heathparks.com
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "michaelaivaliotis"
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > If someone can watch all your videos on a site like Blip.TV, 
Vimeo
> > or
> > > even Youtube - which probably already has a great viewing
> > experience -
> > > Why should they come to your site? what's the compelling 
reason? I
> > > think this is the main question that needs to be answered and
> > thought
> > > about before you start redesigning your site.
> > >
> > > If you can't clearly answer that then your site needs to be 
more of
> > an
> > > "About Me" page with links to your stuff.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, if Blip.TV is the only place you have videos 
and
> > > you are just using them as a virtual hard drive then you need 
to do
> > > some serious work on your site.
> > >
> > > Sorry, I don't have a clear answer but you really need to put 
some
> > > time and money into it if you want your site to be a hub. You 
have
> > to
> > > give people a reason to come back. Honestly, with the concept 
of RSS
> > > feeds in full effect, I never go to an

[videoblogging] Re: Does the "Blog" format work for Vlogging anymore?

[Heath]

So it seems that by having an RSS feed we are actually taking away 
from the communial side of blogging/vlogging?  

I mean if there is no reason to ever go to a site because everyone is 
reading through their reader, than why have a site at all then?

As far as having all of your video's on Blip etc, well I know for me, 
that Blip's Showplayer does not show all of my stuff it only goes 
back about a year, so you are missing anything older...but that is 
neither here nor there...

So I go back to my first statement and ask, Is RSS in effect part of 
the problem?  Is it so easy now to just watch that we are becoming 
passive?  That we no longer care about the communication or the 
connections that can develop?

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "michaelaivaliotis" 
 wrote:
>
> If someone can watch all your videos on a site like Blip.TV, Vimeo 
or
> even Youtube - which probably already has a great viewing 
experience -
> Why should they come to your site? what's the compelling reason? I
> think this is the main question that needs to be answered and 
thought
> about before you start redesigning your site.
> 
> If you can't clearly answer that then your site needs to be more of 
an
> "About Me" page with links to your stuff.
> 
> On the other hand, if Blip.TV is the only place you have videos and
> you are just using them as a virtual hard drive then you need to do
> some serious work on your site.
> 
> Sorry, I don't have a clear answer but you really need to put some
> time and money into it if you want your site to be a hub. You have 
to
> give people a reason to come back. Honestly, with the concept of RSS
> feeds in full effect, I never go to anyone's site anymore. I watch 
all
> your videos in my Google reader. The only reason for me to go to 
your
> site would be to leave a comment. The problem there is I usually 
never
> read the response unless I'm subscribed to the comments via email:
> like Rupert does on his blog (that helps).
> 
> For those that want dynamic related posts. I found a WP plugin here:
> http://mitcho.com/code/yarpp/
> It doesn't do thumbnails but it has great options to show related
> posts (probably the best). I'm currently trying to modify it to show
> thumbnails. The main issue with thumbnails is that you need to
> manually attach a thumbnail to your post and specify that this
> thumbnail is for the video (like is currently done with the vPIP
> plugin). Still some work there. I'm trying to figure out how to get 
it
> to find thumbnails automatically, like it is done in the BlipIt 
plugin:
> http://www.bravenewcode.com/blipit/
> 
> Anyway... more work ahead.
> Michael Aivaliotis
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Heath"  wrote:
> >
> > I agree about the content, and google reader and RSS, etc make 
things 
> > very easy, but when people do come to my site, after maybe seeing 
a 
> > video for the first timeI want it to look as visually 
appealing 
> > as possible and to be able to showcase some of my best stuff and 
> > other things/vlogs I like, etcfor me it's more about 
the "look" 
> > of the site.
> > 
> > I do think you are also right in that it's best to showcase 
video's 
> > on a standalone sight, but then again, how do you get people over 
> > there?  Just a header link, an "ad" on your site, etc...
> > 
> > We spent so much time talking about content, how to make video, 
how 
> > to set up RSS feeds, how to promote your site, etc...but the 
layout 
> > and design we just have pretty much accepted what is out there 
and 
> > made due.let's change that!
> > 
> > Heath
> > http://heathparks.com
>

[videoblogging] Re: NYT article about what we know

[Heath]

Oh, you are supposed to inflate your numbers?!?!?.well in that 
case hundreds of people subsribe to me and I make nickels every 
yearFTW!!!

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "schlomo rabinowitz" 
 wrote:
>
> smpfilms/Williams was one of the first breakout stars as well as a
> galvanizing force to bring other YouTubers together  in real life.  
He
> helped throw the first couple meatspace meetups.
> He also takes promotional consideration every chance he gets.  Even 
his
> youtube channel of his cat is HUGE and keeps climbing the Youtube 
charts.
> 
> He may be inflating numbers (who doesnt?), but I dont think 
he's "that" far
> off the mark.
> 
> Schlomo Rabinowitz
> http://schlomo.tv - finally moving to wordpress
> http://hatfactory.net - relaxed coworking
> AIM:schlomochat
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Jay dedman  wrote:
> 
> >   On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 12:54 PM, schlomo rabinowitz 
>
> > wrote:
> > > Here's an article in today's NYT that probably doesnt tell you 
anything
> > you
> > > dont already know:
> > >
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/business/media/11youtube.html?
_r=2&ref=todayspaper
> >
> > One creator profiled in this article says:
> > "Mr. Williams, who counts about 180,000 subscribers to his videos,
> > said he was earning $17,000 to $20,000 a month via YouTube. "
> >
> > Could that possibly be true?
> > that's over 200k a year.
> >
> > Jay
> >
> > --
> > http://jaydedman.com
> > 917 371 6790
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: No blogging: different visual creations

[Heath]

That gets me to thinking, I think what could be cool is if you could 
have rotating themes like you have rotating headers for some 
sitesor maybe you could specify a theme based on the tags for 
your postthat would be cool wouldn't it!?!?

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jay dedman"  
wrote:
>
> this one is aimed at Heath:
> http://www.redbucketfilms.com/
> 
> if you want to go back to coding html, people are still having fun 
building
> visual websites.
> probably not as helpful if you post often, but why not?
> 
> I remember when ZeFrank started, he was just building is site by 
hand.
> http://www.zefrank.com/
> I cant be sure, but it looks like he moved to a CMS...but still 
looks
> different.
> 
> jay
> 
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: NEW: WordPress 2.7 “Coltrane”

[Heath]

I like the idea of never having to manually update again...thank 
godI was a nervous wreck each time I upgraded.

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jay dedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> http://wordpress.org/development/2008/12/coltrane/
> 
> This is pertaining to the admin page, but i like the talk of drag 
and drop:
> 
> "Digging in further you might notice that every screen is 
customizable.
> > Let's say you never care about author on your post listings — 
just click
> > "Screen Options" and uncheck it and it's instantly gone from the 
page. The
> > same for any module on the dashboard or write screen. If your 
screen is
> > narrow and the menu is taking up too much horizontal room, click 
the arrow
> > to minimize it to be icon-only, and then go to the write page and 
drag and
> > drop everything from the right column into the main one, so your 
posting
> > area is full-screen."
> >
> 
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Does the "Blog" format work for Vlogging anymore?

[Heath]

I agree about the content, and google reader and RSS, etc make things 
very easy, but when people do come to my site, after maybe seeing a 
video for the first timeI want it to look as visually appealing 
as possible and to be able to showcase some of my best stuff and 
other things/vlogs I like, etcfor me it's more about the "look" 
of the site.

I do think you are also right in that it's best to showcase video's 
on a standalone sight, but then again, how do you get people over 
there?  Just a header link, an "ad" on your site, etc...

We spent so much time talking about content, how to make video, how 
to set up RSS feeds, how to promote your site, etc...but the layout 
and design we just have pretty much accepted what is out there and 
made due.let's change that!

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "RatbagMedia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> The core complication isn't so much video per se but the whole Web 
2.0
> multimedia explosion. Text is easy to format and showcase -- we've
> been laying it out for centuries -- but digital media is a major
> complication. 
> 
> I come from audio blogging/podcasting and the rot sets in when you 
try
> to combine media elements -- in my case: text + audio + digital
> presentations ('powerpoints') + slide shows + videos. While this
> discussion list no doubt has some QuickTime preferences the unifying
> (and contradictory) element on the web is flash media.
> 
> That changes the dialogue a lot.
> 
> In mindset I'm a total bloggerfile as I know nuthin'  else to speak
> about so I tend to pursue the glorious  quest of trying to get as 
much
> return as I can from the one blog platform -- in my case , Blogger.
> Thats' all I know.
> 
> Nonetheless I think the Blip TV channel player is the best media
> showcase hardware I've come across on the web. So that guests on my
> videoblog too.
> 
> Elsewhere I am very eclectic and in other blogs I work on I like to
> use Vodpod widgets and the new Vodspot platform.
> 
> http://blog.vodpod.com/2008/12/09/announcing-vodspot/
> 
> and I cross post like mad --albeit selectively.
> 
> While I will subscribe keenly to an audio feed and automatically
> download the Mp3 files I won't do that for video, preferring instead
> to monitor videoblogging sites by subscribing to their feeds in 
Google
> reader. I then quickly review their content before deciding to
> continue watching. ( I don't however sample audio like that.)
> 
> So what the site looks like is neither here nor there as RSS rules.
> 
> Nonetheless with site showcasing -- and I do this with audio -- it 
is
> often useful to divide up your offerings into themes. I currently
> offer standalone players for "Best of" my videos, " Videos from
> elsewhere" and my own all-in channel in the same way that I always
> divide up my audio wares and offer them in pop up players.
> 
> But the reality is, I fear, that no one knows how to design the best
> of all possible web or video sites so there are all these people
> working away at the coal face, tweaking as they go -- designing a 
> better mousetrap
> 
> Nonethless,some of the best video feeds I subscribe can emanate from
> the most sterile of CSS sites. So let's not get too caught up 
in 
> form over content.
> 
> dave riley
> http://ratbaggy.blogspot.com/
>

[videoblogging] Re: Does the "Blog" format work for Vlogging anymore?

[Heath]

Right, WP does have a lot of video plugins, and I do like WP as a way
to have my "site", but on the video plugin front it seems most are
just a way to collect random video's from YT, etc.  Now I will admit I
have not looked at all the video plugins but in this whole process of
re-doing my sites, I looked at a lot of plugins...There are plugins to
display your video, podpress, flash players, Vodpod and a couple of
others but none really address the "look" of the site and to be honest
the Blip player is starting to look really, really good.  

So then we are to embed and there are a few that help with that, but
again, some are hinky, some won't work with the latest wordpress and
some are just bad.  

Then you have all your recent posts or ramdom postsmost don't take
advantage of the Video format or even the photo format to be
honest...there are a few that I have seen but again, they are a bit
hinky, I mean if I have to go into code, or read a freakin novel to
figure out how a plugin is to work.that doesn't appeal to me...I
am a creatorI am not a programer, I mean I have learned stuff, but
it makes my head hurt and then once I figure something out on the code
side the creative part of me is beat and I don't feel like making the
very thing I wanted to make in the first place..

That for me is one of my biggest struggles, balancing the "look" of my
site and just creating the stuffI admire those who do both

I am glad to see so much conversation going on though, it's good to
just talk about all this and who knows maybe we can find/make a better
way...  ;)

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jay dedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The only "issue" and it's not really an issue is that you have to
> > manually define the related video's with Charles's plugin. It would
> > be nice if it just randomly selected related video's and have the
> > option to select one's yourself. And while I do like SIAB, there are
> > still some drawbacks that I think are stil mainly related to the
> > whole blog structure.
> 
> yeah...showinabox.tv/forum was really just a way to start a new
> conversation about using video and Worpress since WP seemed to be the
> preferred blogging platform. SIAB is by no means a technical solution.
> the experience has taught us just how much development/design work it
> takes to make new themes and plugins. Plus the maintenance of these
> things you build as well.
> 
> by the way, the wordpress community has about 100 video plugins:
> http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/search.php/page/7?q=video
> 
> Jay
> 
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
>

[videoblogging] Re: Does the "Blog" format work for Vlogging anymore?

[Heath]

Yeah, Rupert it was your video that got me to thinking about all this 
even more than I currently was.  Again I go back to there are some 
things I like, I think you can create a community with the blog 
format and it's easy...I think for me, it's more the layout than 
anything and I just want easier ways for people to connect with my 
older stuff.

I have some other ideas as well, but I want to flesh them about a bit 
first...

And also, it's knowing what you want to do...I mean I like the 
personal aspect of vlogging, I like Rupert, Jay, Ryanne, Michael, 
Robert, Croma, David Meade, Bekah, Cheryl, Clintus, etc etc...I like 
watching those guys and gals, so I would never want that personal 
side to go away...I do wish we could figure out how to be more 
communal with our approach and sitesI mean that was the whole 
thing behind my "Vids I Like" tab on my sitebut does anyone ever 
check out that?  How do I also show the things and stuff I like from 
other people on my front page, where most of the action happens?...

Great thoughts so far from everyoneI love it!!

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I did a video rant about this a couple of weeks ago.
> 
> I've been thinking about different layouts and ways of presenting  
> things since then.
> 
> Great thoughts, Ron - particularly what you note how we're  
> comfortable with line-by-line communication in a vertical format, 
but  
> how it's limited the success of the traditional videoblog - and 
how  
> daunting it is for a viewer to face a bunch of videos in a line 
down  
> the page.
> 
> I've seen this problem when watching people go to my videoblog.
> It's not just a problem for the viewer, it's a problem for the 
producer.
> 
> Reading your post made me realise how much I've forced myself to 
like  
> the blog format because that's what everyone uses - even though  
> initially I thought it sucked.  But when we started out, it was 
the  
> easiest way to do publishing and podcasting.
> 
> Now I've totally fallen out of love with the blog format.  So much 
so  
> that I can't seem to drum up the motivation to put any energy into  
> making videos until I can feel good about how I publish them.
> 
> I've been thinking about the successful shows you mentioned - FU,  
> Ninja, Rocketboom.  Wreck & Salvage and LoFi St Louis have good 
new  
> designs, too - which encourage people to browse more freely and 
don't  
> force the reader to deal with this heirarchy of freshness/relevance.
> 
> For me, I think there may be an element of needing more 
interlinked  
> networking between producers - to allow people to browse outside 
of  
> your own videos.  Jesus, that sounds like a web-ring.  But isn't 
that  
> the best thing about YouTube? That you can choose to see more 
videos  
> by the same person or jump to something related but made by 
someone  
> totally different?
> 
> I don't know.  I'm stuck.  But it's good to read your thoughts on 
it.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
> On 10-Dec-08, at 10:05 AM, Ron Watson wrote:
> 
> Great topic, Heath!
> 
> I've been doing online video since 1998, and I was very excited with
> the explosion of digital video in 2005. It was awesome!
> 
> I dabbled with wordpress and the blog format for a while, but it was
> obvious to me rather quickly that the long vertical videoblog (and
> blog, for that matter) was a dead end in terms of viability.
> 
> It's daunting to scroll down a page and see an hour of video. It
> makes the small, short flicks and turns them into a day long 
endeavor.
> 
> I think the traditional blog format is great for RSS feeds and for
> archival purposes, but as far as presentation of content, it's not
> good for holding people's attention.
> 
> If you're content is very special or totally rock solid, you can 
hold
> an audience, but you are fighting against a faulty design.
> 
> There are 2 ways in which the traditional blog layout fails for 
video
> blogging.
> 
> Story telling and Community.
> 
> ---
> Story Telling
> ---
> 
> I took a critical look at a person from this list's new project, and
> that's what I found to be the critical fault in the presentation of
> content. He had all this great content, a really sweet, honest and
> appealing vibe, beautiful theming, but it all went out the window
> when I scrolled down the page and saw 15 5 minute videos all
> presented as a running commentary - essentially a very long 
monologue.
> 
> I have no doubt that the content was personally appealing (although 
I
> couldn't watch

[videoblogging] Re: Does the "Blog" format work for Vlogging anymore?

[Heath]

The only "issue" and it's not really an issue is that you have to 
manually define the related video's with Charles's plugin.  It would 
be nice if it just randomly selected related video's and have the 
option to select one's yourself.  And while I do like SIAB, there are 
still some drawbacks that I think are stil mainly related to the 
whole blog structure.

I have been mulling over how I would like my ideal theme and once I 
have that, I will start a thread on SIAB but I am interested to hear 
what others think as well, what do people like, dislike, etc...I mean 
let's really look at how this is all done, I'd really like to see 
some kick butt inovations out there related to video themes...among 
other things

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jay dedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> > However, now.I am not so sure. I mean every time you make a
> > video and post, that video moves down the list and soon it's off 
your
> > homepage in some cases, never to be seen again. Now for some, 
maybe
> > that is no big deal, but.I think some of us all make a few 
videos
> > that we are especially proud of, and in the current blog/vlog 
format,
> > there is no easy way (I know we can sticky but if you sticky more
> > than a couple no one will ever see your new content on your site) 
to
> > show off those posts.
> > It seems to me that there is a huge lack in the number of themes 
that
> > take advatage of vlogging. I mean with the explosion of online
> > video, you would think we would have more, but I only know of a 
small
> > handful and most of those you have to pay for.
> 
> Agreed.
> this was the thinking behind http://showinabox.tv.
> just trying to kickstart the awareness that a blog platform like
> Wordpress has a lot of room to expand when it comes to 
videoblogging.
> 
> I think there are actually a lot more plugins being built these 
days for video.
> But yes, the videocentric themes are the missing link.
> It's a lot of work to build a theme.
> 
> Cheryl Colan built this theme for us: http://ryanishungry.com
> it does a lot of the things you're talking about when we used it 
with
> the plugins that Charles built.
> lots of thumbnails and searchable text.
> when you click on a video...older, related videos pop up so our
> archive stays fresh.
> 
> I think the biggest challenge is just imagining the "perfect theme" 
for you.
> Draw it out on a piece of paper.
> Then find a themer willing to build it (and be willing to pay them!)
> 
> what does your perfect videoblog look like?
> 
> Jay
> 
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
>

[videoblogging] Does the "Blog" format work for Vlogging anymore?

[Heath]

I have been doing a lot of thinking as I come close to my 3 year mark 
of vlogging.  From the outset of vlogging almost everyone settled on 
the blog format for their site.  And I think at that time it worked.

However, now.I am not so sure.  I mean every time you make a 
video and post, that video moves down the list and soon it's off your 
homepage in some cases, never to be seen again.  Now for some, maybe 
that is no big deal, but.I think some of us all make a few videos 
that we are especially proud of, and in the current blog/vlog format, 
there is no easy way (I know we can sticky but if you sticky more 
than a couple no one will ever see your new content on your site) to 
show off those posts.

It seems to me that there is a huge lack in the number of themes that 
take advatage of vlogging.  I mean with the explosion of online 
video, you would think we would have more, but I only know of a small 
handfull and most of those you have to pay for.

I am just curious as to what you all think?  I just don't knowI 
mean part of me likes the blog/vlog format as it is, but I find 
myself longing for a different way to show off my video's moreso the 
ones that I want to showcase or ones that I am fond of...I mean I 
could revlog but

So what do you all like and dislike about the current vlog format?  
What would you like to see?  Just curious...

Heath
http://heathparks.com

[videoblogging] Re: A colors question

[Heath]

Yea, that was my thought tooI mean if every moniter's color is 
just a "bit" different then there is no end to the madnessI have 
noticed the darker the color the less likey it is to be shown as 
different.  I guess I know now why so many web designers stick to 
darker colors...  :-)

Heath
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Miles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> different gamma of the different monitors. macs trad. are brighter  
> than PCs, and if you don't turn the knobs then your monitor might 
also  
> be too much of one color (like your colour tv set).
> 
> on a mac system preferences - display always let you build a 
custom   
> profile or use a preset. no idea on pc. personally I don't bother  
> since you can't go around determining everyone's monitors for your  
> work :-) (but if you were editing for publishing/tv then it does  
> matter...)
> 
> 
> On 30/11/2008, at 1:45 AM, Heath wrote:
> 
> > I have recently begun playing around with creating websites and I 
have
> > noticed that the appearance of my site, the colors, is different 
on my
> > laptop vs my desktop. Why is this? Does anyone know? What about
> > when you are doing color correcting in your video, if I edit it 
on my
> > laptop is it going to look different when played back on a 
desktop? I
> > think yes
> >
> > Any thoughts or suggestions please let me know
> >
> 
> 
> cheers
> Adrian Miles
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> bachelor communication honours coordinator
> vogmae.net.au
>

[videoblogging] A colors question

[Heath]

I have recently begun playing around with creating websites and I have
noticed that the appearance of my site, the colors, is different on my
laptop vs my desktop.  Why is this?  Does anyone know?  What about
when you are doing color correcting in your video, if I edit it on my
laptop is it going to look different when played back on a desktop?  I
think yes

Any thoughts or suggestions please let me know

Heath
http://heathparks.com

[videoblogging] Re: my blog post links

[Heath]

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I can't think of many occasions I've found  
> a "human readable" link useful.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
That's because you are not really human Rupertyou are like the 
next stage of human developmentor an alien from outerspacenot 
sure which

:-)  

You are and always shall be, my friend

Heath
http://www.H.com


> 
> On 20-Nov-08, at 8:25 AM, quintanomedia wrote:
> 
> now that I fixed the digg problem. I noticed that most of my links 
for
> each post look like this
> 
> http://www.quintanomedia.com/?p=443
> 
> how come it doesnt have the title of my post in the url?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type

[Heath]

Maybe it's because I only watch or subsribe to a certain number of 
people, but I always get the feeling that for every Epic Fu or Ask a 
Ninja, there are a thousand "shows" like minewhich isn't a show 
at all, just a personal vlog...so for them to not be aware or to 
state that "only we can do Hero's"maybe he is sorta 
rightagain maybe it's because I don't watch a lot of 
internet "shows" so I am missing out...but when I search YT, or Yahoo 
video, etcall I see are just a bunch of viral videos

I don't know, I am sure there is talent out there but it still seems 
a bit fragmented at times.

I don't know, I agree that it is frustratingI am just not smart 
enough to figure out how to change it.

Heath



--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey Taylor" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's just infuriating. Just plain infuriating. Both these top 
executives
> have massive, multi-purpose staff and they''re STILL in a bubble. 
NBC is
> starting a digital studio instead of cutting a deal with the
> well-established Epic-Fu franchise.  It just steams me up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2008/11/13 Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> >   Nothing I ever hear about TV executives' approach to the 
internet
> > ever gives me any hope. Apparently, none of them ever use the
> > internet. And if they do, they're so busy being threatened that 
they
> > adopt a confused and contemptuous attitude before they've even
> > clicked on the first video.
> >
> > I read two great posts by Steve Bowbrick yesterday about trying to
> > change this mindset at the BBC.
> >
> > He's "blogger in residence" for six months at the BBC. Which is a
> > great idea - someone from outside to blog about life inside.
> >
> > First, his thoughts about how and why they need to move on from 
the
> > broadcast mindset.
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/11/
> > moving_on_from_the_broadcast_e.html
> >
> > But more importantly for you to read out there in hell, Jeffrey:
> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/bowbrick/2958508580/
> >
> > A whiteboard image of the "obstacles to sharing" with typical
> > reactions in quotes just like those you just repeated from
> > Silverman. The obstacles are grouped under Rights; Culture;
> > Expectations; Competitive Instincts; Regulation.
> >
> > The quotes associated with the obstacles are:
> > Rights: "Impossible to untangle"
> > Expectations: "It'll just be a bunch of pornographers"
> > Culture: "We don't do that sort of thing"
> > Competitive Instincts: "We compete in primetime - why should we
> > cooperate here"
> > Regulation: "They'll never let us do that"
> >
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> >
> > On 13-Nov-08, at 5:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
> >
> > They're totally ignoring all the great content that's out there by
> > independent producers. Direct quote from Silverman: "we don't want
> > cat pissing in toilet videos associated with our brand." 
and "only we
> > can do something like heroes".
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jay Dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
> >
> > Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 07:52:58
> > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <
> > videoblogging@yahoogroups.com >
> > Cc: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <
> > videoblogging@yahoogroups.com >
> > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Traditional Media Scares the Shi* 
out of
> > me As I Type
> >
> > Can you be more specific about their approach or lack of 
understanding?
> >
> > Jay
> >
> > On Nov 13, 2008, at 7:01 AM, "Jeffrey Taylor"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > I'm currently at the Monaco Media Forum, watching Michael Wolff
> > > interview
> > > Ben Silverman of NBC/Universal and the Director-General of the 
BBC.
> > >
> > > These guys don't get it. At all. It's all top down. They have 
know
> > > idea
> > > what's out there, and they really can't be arsed to look.
> > >
> > > I am so pissed off right now.
> > >
> > > Discuss.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jeffrey Taylor
> > > Mobile: +33625497654
> > > Fax: +33177722734
> > > Skype: thejeffreytaylor
> > > Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jeffrey Taylor
> Mobile: +33625497654
> Fax: +33177722734
> Skype: thejeffreytaylor
> Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: TroopTube (I shit you not)

[Heath]

Don't get me wrong Adam, part of me is cynical tooI mean serving 
does that to youyou see a lot of BS, covered in "National 
Security".but I also know how careful you do have to be 
especially in this timethis is still all new to the military as 
well, the fact that they are even creating something like TroupTube 
blows me away.

But one thing I do know from being a soldieryou can always find a 
way to get your stuff out....  :-)  

Heath

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Adam Quirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You're right, we should wait and see. I guess I did jump the gun a 
bit.
> 
> But my inner cynic has a really strong feeling that this is just 
more
> propaganda and censorship wrapped in a package that says "Internet".
> 
> *Adam Quirk* / Wreck & Salvage <http://wreckandsalvage.com> /
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] / +1 551.208.4644 (m) / imbullemhead (aim)
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Well, since I was in the army, served in a war and now vlog, I 
guess
> > I can chime in with my 2 cents.
> >
> > It is my understanding that the Army blocked YT, Myspace and a few
> > others on their networks, the reason being the use of bandwith and
> > the potential for virus attacks...again this was on the military
> > network, no different than my work blocking YT, myspace, facebook
> > etcI mean they do pay me to work not visit the yahoo 
group..  :-)
> >
> > I am sure some of it is concern that someone may let something 
slip
> > that is classified, or that something may be shown etcand to 
be
> > honest I can not blame themthey are in combatand there are
> > very real security issues at stake.
> >
> > So the military is making a site avaiable...who knows how it will
> > work out, it may be crap, but if a soldier has access to some 
public
> > internet, he could always use that to post videos, and they are 
still
> > allowing them to use the military IP to post blogs, so I am 
inclined
> > to believe that it was just a bandwith and security issue..
> >
> > Let's just see before we go all "postal" on the military
> >
> > And to all those that are serving or have family servingThank
> > you
> >
> > Heath A proud Vet
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Adam Quirk"  wrote:
> > >
> > > There are more than 2, and they all seem to be of the "life 
shure
> > is swell"
> > > demeanor http://www.trooptube.tv/videos/featured
> > >
> > > I didn't know that Youtube was blocked by military IPs. That 
must
> > be a very
> > > recent thing, because there are a ton of uploaded videos on 
there
> > from our
> > > troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
> > >
> > > You can't make this out very well without logging in and 
friending
> > her, but
> > > in my cousin's facebook profile picture, she wrote the words "I
> > Hate Iraq"
> > > in the sand with her boot. http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?
> > id=47211212 <http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=47211212>
> > >
> > > That's the sort of thing that probably wouldn't fly on 
Trooptube.
> > >
> > > *Adam Quirk* / Wreck & Salvage <http://wreckandsalvage.com> /
> > > quirk@ / +1 551.208.4644 (m) / imbullemhead (aim)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Jay dedman  
wrote:
> > >
> > > > > It's actually not that bad.
> > > > > In a lot of places, when accessing the web from a .mil IP
> > address sites
> > > > are
> > > > > blocked (particularly consistently stateside). YouTube is 
one
> > of the ones
> > > > > blocked. (
> > > > >
> > > > http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/11/trooptube-restores-
streaming-
> > video-to-our-nations-
finest/<http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/11/trooptube-restores-
streaming-video-to-our-nations-finest/>
> > > > )
> > > > > So, if you think about it, trooptube is pretty cool - every
> > soldier has
> > > > > access to a public vid sharing site that is probably going 
to
> > be visited
> > > > by
> > > > > a higher density of users who care about/ can relate to what
> > they're
> > > > > posting. It will likely help cut back on the youtube 
comments
> > which lend
> > > > 

[videoblogging] Re: TroopTube (I shit you not)

[Heath]

Well, since I was in the army, served in a war and now vlog, I guess 
I can chime in with my 2 cents.

It is my understanding that the Army blocked YT, Myspace and a few 
others on their networks, the reason being the use of bandwith and 
the potential for virus attacks...again this was on the military 
network, no different than my work blocking YT, myspace, facebook 
etcI mean they do pay me to work not visit the yahoo group..  :-)

I am sure some of it is concern that someone may let something slip 
that is classified, or that something may be shown etcand to be 
honest I can not blame themthey are in combatand there are 
very real security issues at stake.

So the military is making a site avaiable...who knows how it will 
work out, it may be crap, but if a soldier has access to some public 
internet, he could always use that to post videos, and they are still 
allowing them to use the military IP to post blogs, so I am inclined 
to believe that it was just a bandwith and security issue..

Let's just see before we go all "postal" on the military

And to all those that are serving or have family servingThank 
you

Heath A proud Vet



--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Adam Quirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There are more than 2, and they all seem to be of the "life shure 
is swell"
> demeanor http://www.trooptube.tv/videos/featured
> 
> I didn't know that Youtube was blocked by military IPs. That must 
be a very
> recent thing, because there are a ton of uploaded videos on there 
from our
> troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
> 
> You can't make this out very well without logging in and friending 
her, but
> in my cousin's facebook profile picture, she wrote the words "I 
Hate Iraq"
> in the sand with her boot. http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?
id=47211212
> 
> That's the sort of thing that probably wouldn't fly on Trooptube.
> 
> *Adam Quirk* / Wreck & Salvage <http://wreckandsalvage.com> /
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] / +1 551.208.4644 (m) / imbullemhead (aim)
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > > It's actually not that bad.
> > > In a lot of places, when accessing the web from a .mil IP 
address sites
> > are
> > > blocked (particularly consistently stateside). YouTube is one 
of the ones
> > > blocked. (
> > >
> > http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/11/trooptube-restores-streaming-
video-to-our-nations-finest/
> > )
> > > So, if you think about it, trooptube is pretty cool - every 
soldier has
> > > access to a public vid sharing site that is probably going to 
be visited
> > by
> > > a higher density of users who care about/ can relate to what 
they're
> > > posting. It will likely help cut back on the youtube comments 
which lend
> > > themselves more to douchebaggery than to constructive support.
> > > I have to give it a thumbs up.
> >
> > Interesting that we have 2 widely different views here.
> > obviously, the proof will be what is actually posted in the month.
> > So far there are 2 videos.
> >
> > Will it be simply "the army is great!"...or will there be
> > conversation, constructive criticism, and crazy antics that 
soldiers
> > like to record of themselves.
> >
> > jay
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://jaydedman.com
> > 917 371 6790
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: The Death of the internet as we know it....

[Heath]

I agree that it is a finate resourse to a point...however, some of 
the caps being floated, given where the internet is headed is very 
low.  And in a previous email, I do state that I know this practice 
is very much in play outside the states.  

But given the fact we have companies who are trying to run TV over 
the internet, in Hi Def mind you, these companies are "selling" to us 
the "Bigger is better", mantra.I mean how many times in this own 
fourm have people stated "Traditional TV is dead, it's all going to 
come over the internet"well that can't happen at 5 gigs or 8 gigs 
a month

And I understand about compression, but even a highly compressed HD 
file is still rather large..

Understand it's not so much "today" I am worried about, it's next 
year or the year after that.

Heath  "The Artist"
www.??.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Miles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Not sure I have tthis right but if it is a monthly cap then this 
is  
> the norm here in Australia and always has been. Has been one of 
the  
> reasons why I argue very strongly for proper compression and also  
> other aesthetic requirements in videoblogging. I get 8GB a month, 
but  
> have the advantage of a university job during the day. A feature 
film  
> is around 500MB, so that's 16 features a month, which if you're a 
AV  
> professional is not much, but for the majority is probably in the 
ball  
> park.
> 
> However, I am going to poke the possum here (colloquial Australian  
> expression, stir up things if you like).
> 
> I don't understand why there is an attitude where bandwidth is 
treated  
> as infinite and not a finite resource. It is a finite resource. 
Data  
> and digital duplication of our material is trivial, but 
transferring  
> that to other places is not. For example, even in Australia the  
> majority of our schools have quite poor bandwidth, and if I want 
my  
> work to be viewed in regional Australia (and for that matter parts 
of  
> rural United States) then I have to be aware that bandwidth is  
> constrained. Now bandwidth might be fast or slow, but it does have 
a  
> width, and it is a material infrastructure with its associated 
costs.  
> Just as with telephony there are international, national, and 
local  
> agreements about how much a byte costs, and while the telcos might  
> make lots from it (or not), the pipes are not infinite.
> 
> Treating it as infinite leads to what I teach my students is  
> "bandwidth pollution". Emails with stupid large attachments, 
videos  
> that run to gigabytes. First industrialised world bandwidth 
arrogance  
> is the internet equivalent of cheap oil (the analogy is simply if 
oil  
> is finite, but cheap, then there is little incentive not to use it, 
in  
> spite of it's inevitable disappearance and of course the pollution 
it  
> is causing). The solution then becomes simply adding more. More  
> cables, more electricity to run it all, and presumably more time 
for  
> us to actually view all this extra material (I know, that's  
> facetious). Here in my state we used to (20 years ago) think that  
> water was infinite, and you pretty much got it for free. Then they  
> started charging for it, on the reasonable basis that a) some 
people  
> used more than others so if you had a swimming pool and fancy 
garden  
> why shouldn't you pay more? and b) it required expensive  
> infrastructure which needed to be paid for and c) it might 
encourage  
> water conversation. We are now in a major and prolonged drought 
with  
> substantial water restrictions. The governments response is to 
spend  
> billions on desalination and pipelines (bigger fatter pipes) 
instead  
> of spending the same money on ways to reduce our demand for water. 
I  
> live on the driest continent on earth yet outside my window right 
now  
> are English style gardens with roses, azaleas and fuschias.
> 
> The point? Bigger pipes is like cheap oil is like infinite 
bandwidth.  
> It supports an economy (of mind, of practice and of institutions)  
> which thinks the answer is simply more, not less. Compress 
properly,  
> think about length. Sustainability applies here as much (if not 
more  
> given the energy demands of the net) as the real world. And the 
model  
> of "I should have as much as I want" translates poorly outside of 
very  
> specific cultural and political economies.
> 
> On 05/11/2008, at 7:42 AM, Heath wrote:
> 
> > I just did another post about this from another communications
> > company but now another big dog in the US is going to start 
limiting
> > bandwidthAT & T...I am telling you all, this is going to 
stiffle
> > most video on the web, at some of these limits watching one movie
> > over Netflix will put you over for the month. Things like VloMo,
> > will go awayit's scary.its real scary
> 
> 
> cheers
> Adrian Miles
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> bachelor communication honours coordinator
> vogmae.net.au
>

[videoblogging] Re: The Death of the internet as we know it....

[Heath]

One company, Fronteir wants to go as low as 5 gigs a monthThat's 
maybe a movie, Hulu?  forget about it, Itunes?, forget about it...

We need to pay attention to this stuff...

Heath "The Artist"

www.?.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> The devil is in the detail, ie how large the cap is. 
> 
> I dont see anything to suggest that limits are low enough to stop 
you
> watching a few movies, but over the course of a month the gigabytes
> can really add up. I prefer daily cap's, and if they dont make them
> too low, it will be mostly ok. Not ideal for sure, but not the end 
of
> the internet by a long shot, we have lived with limits in the UK and
> it hasnt broken the internet or changed most people's behaviour.
> 
> All the same I wont get too complacent because over the coming years
> things could certainly change for the worst, but I dont predict 
utter
> doom on this front, there is a lot of big business that relies on 
the
> internet continuing mostly as we've known it so far.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Steve Elbows
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jay dedman"  
wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Heath  wrote:
> > > I just did another post about this from another communications
> > > company but now another big dog in the US is going to start 
limiting
> > > bandwidthAT & T...I am telling you all, this is going to 
stiffle
> > > most video on the web, at some of these limits watching one 
movie
> > > over Netflix will put you over for the month. Things like VloMo,
> > > will go awayit's scary.its real scary
> > >
> 
http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20081104/ap_on_hi_te/tec_at_t_internet_c
aps
> > 
> > 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
> >
>

[videoblogging] The Death of the internet as we know it....

[Heath]

I just did another post about this from another communications 
company but now another big dog in the US is going to start limiting 
bandwidthAT & T...I am telling you all, this is going to stiffle 
most video on the web, at some of these limits watching one movie 
over Netflix will put you over for the month.  Things like VloMo, 
will go awayit's scary.its real scary

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20081104/ap_on_hi_te/tec_at_t_internet_c
aps

Heath  "The Artist"
http://batmangeek.com

NEW YORK - AT&T Inc., the country's largest Internet service 
provider, is testing the idea of limiting the amount of data that 
subscribers can use each month.

AT&T will initially apply the limits in Reno, Nev., and see about 
extending the practice elsewhere.

Increasingly, Internet providers across the country are placing such 
limits on the amount of data users can upload and download each 
month, as a way to curb a small number of "bandwidth hogs" who use a 
lot of the network capacity. For instance, 5 percent of AT&T's 
subscribers take up 50 percent of the capacity, spokesman Michael Coe 
said Tuesday.

But the restrictions that Internet providers are setting are 
tentative. And the companies differ on what limits to set and whether 
to charge users for going beyond the caps.

Starting in November, AT&T will limit downloads to 20 gigabytes per 
month for users of their slowest DSL service, at 768 kilobits per 
second. The limit increases with the speed of the plan, up to 150 
gigabytes per month at the 10 megabits-per-second level.

To exceed the limits, subscribers would need to download constantly 
at maximum speeds for more than 42 hours, depending on the tier. In 
practice, use of e-mail and the Web wouldn't take a subscriber 
anywhere near the limit, but streaming video services like the one 
Netflix Inc. offers could. For example, subscribers who get downloads 
of 3 megabits per second have a monthly cap of 60 gigabytes, which 
allows for the download of about 30 DVD-quality movies.

The limits will initially apply to new customers in the Reno area, 
AT&T said. Current users will be enrolled if they exceed 150 
gigabytes in a month, regardless of their connection speed.

"This is a preliminary step to find the right model to address this 
trend," Coe said. The company may add another market to the test 
before the end of the year, he said.

Customers will be able to track their usage on an AT&T Web site. The 
company will also contact people who reach 80 percent of their limit. 
After a grace period to get subscribers acquainted with the system, 
those who exceed their allotment will pay $1 per gigabyte, Coe said.

Comcast Corp., the nation's second-largest Internet service provider 
and AT&T's competitor in Reno, last month officially began a 
nationwide traffic limit of 250 gigabytes per subscriber. Comcast 
doesn't charge people extra for going over the limit, but will cancel 
service after repeated warnings. Previously, it had a secret limit.

Two other ISPs, Time Warner Cable Inc. and FairPoint Communications 
Inc., are planning or testing traffic limits as low as 5 gigabytes 
per month, which is easily exceeded by watchers of DVD-quality online 
video.

Among the largest ISPs, Verizon Communications Inc. is a holdout, and 
has said it does not plan to limit downloads.

[videoblogging] Frontier Communications to impose caps on free downloads and uploads

[Heath]

I know in many places outside the states this is already in place, 
but here in the states this is somewhat new.  As mentioned in the 
article, Time Warner is doing a test in Texas and Comcast just 
announced some planned changes.  And for those on Satilite, I know 
that there are limits as well.  What concerns me about this company 
is the riduculusly low starting point.  It would discounge those in 
rural areas from accessing anything other than email.  5 gigs?!?!?  
that is just crazy.we have to stop this now or we will give up 
the abiltiy to use the net how we have.I mean vlogging will go 
bye, bye, heck photo sharing would be tough at 5 gigs!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27519819/

Heath

The artist 

www.batmangeek.com

NEW YORK - Phone company Frontier Communications Co. will probably 
charge its subscribers a dollar or two per gigabyte of Internet 
traffic if they go over the monthly allotments the company plans to 
introduce next year, Frontier's chief executive said Friday.

The company is at the forefront of what CEO Maggie Wilderotter 
believes is a trend among Internet service providers toward billing 
for the amount of data subscribers use, rather than all-you-can-eat 
monthly plans.

Frontier provides service mainly in rural areas of 25 states. 
Rochester, New York, is its largest market.

The company caused confusion and some dismay among customers earlier 
this year, when it said it would charge for Internet use above 5 
gigabytes per month, starting next year.

U.S. Internet users have no experience with tracking their usage. 
There have been few caps in place on downloads, and the existing caps 
have been so high that they affected only a tiny fraction of users.

Frontier's planned cap would apply to the total amount of data that 
users download and upload in a given month. A traffic allowance of 5 
gigabytes is enough for thousands of Web pages, or tens of thousands 
of e-mails, but could be exceeded by the download of three DVD-
quality movies.

Wilderotter said Frontier was looking at providing higher monthly 
limits, perhaps 20 gigabytes per month, in more urban markets like 
Rochester and Elk Grove, California, where usage is higher than rural 
areas.

The company will also sell plans with higher download caps for higher 
prices, Wilderotter told The Associated Press, at increments like 10, 
20 and 50 gigabytes.

That sort of tiered pricing for Internet usage is being tested in 
Texas by Time Warner Cable Inc., which is also Frontier's competitor 
in Rochester.

"All networks are going to have to move to that paradigm in order to 
stay profitable," Wilderotter said at a conference in New York.

"The business model that we're using today really has our light users 
subsidizing our heavy users," she said.

Internet usage can vary enormously from household to household. As an 
example, Wilderotter said 23 of its customers take up 28 percent of 
the network capacity in a town in West Virginia.

Charging the heavy users more is fairer and makes sure that the 
company gets a return on investments in capacity upgrades, she said.

The change to usage-based pricing, if it gains momentum, could have 
implications for companies like Netflix Inc. and Apple Inc. that are 
selling movie downloads, since those take up a lot of capacity.

[videoblogging] Re: Final Cut Pro for PCs

[Heath]

I will echo Rupert's comments.  I have been using Sony Vegas since I 
have started and it's a great program.  I highly recomend it, for 
PC's, I think it's one of the best out there...and you can get a pro 
version of Vegas, sans the DVD authoring for 130 bucks at B&Hit's 
highly, highly, worth it...

Heath
the artist formally known as "The Batman Geek"

http://batmangeek.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I would seriously recommend using Sony Vegas.  Try the basic 
version  
> on a 30 day trial.  It's got tutorials with it.  I much prefer it 
to  
> Premiere or Avid.  Unless you're doing serious high-end work, the  
> basic Sony Vegas will do everything you need, with multiple 
tracks,  
> for about $60.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
> On 30-Oct-08, at 6:43 PM, Kris Boustedt wrote:
> 
> Apple has not built a Windows-compatible version of Final Cut, and  
> likely
> never will -- it sells too many Macs. :-)
> 
> On the Windows side, however, there is Adobe Premier Pro, Sony 
Vegas  
> Pro and
> Avid Media Composer...among a few others, but those are the most  
> comparable
> to FCP, it seems.
> 
> Adobe Premier Pro: http://www.adobe.com/products/premiere/
> Sony Vegas Pro: http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/vegaspro
> Avid Media Composer:
> http://www.avid.com/products/Media-Composer-Software/index.asp
> 
> -- 
> Kris Boustedt | First Sight Productions
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 206.354.5031
> Filmmaker | Editor | Apple Certified Trainer
> Associate Faculty, Shoreline Community College
> http://www.firstsightproductions.com
> 
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 6:37 PM, Miranda Leitsinger  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  > wrote:
> 
>  > Hi there,
>  >
>  > Wondering if there is Final Cut Pro for PCs? Or is there only 
Adobe
>  > Premier?
>  >
>  > Appreciate any guidance!
>  >
>  > Best
>  > Miranda
>  >
>  >
>  >
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] blip tv showplayer

[Heath]

Last night I started playing around again with the showplayer from 
Blip.tv  I have to say I was really impressed, you can put your h.264 
mp4 video's in the showplayer now, (not sure how long that has been a 
feature for them), but it's not just that, they are doing a really good 
job of making a player that is very easy to use and very functional.

I have been a Vpip guy for a bit now, but I am giving the showplayer a 
very hard look, with auto cross posting and a ton of features, if you 
haven't looked at blip or their showplayer, I would suggest you do

Heath

the artist formally known as "The Batman Geek"

www.?.com

[videoblogging] Re: VloMo08 - Videoblogging Month 2008

[Heath]

thank god you said it doesn't have to be high quality, cause lord 
knows, I am about as low quality as you get!

Heath

The artist formally known as "The Batman Geek"

www.?.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> All right, then.  24 hours later and a massive 21 votes have been 
cast.
> The most popular shorthand name / tag - though with only 33% - is:
> 
> VloMo08
> 
> A suitably brief tag for our Twitterholic world.
> 
> So it's VloMo - or Videoblogging Month.  Or Vlogging Month, if you  
> can bring yourself to say that.  Whatever, call it what you want 
when  
> you describe it.  But the tag and the channel and all official 
things  
> will be in the form VloMo08.
> 
> As I've already said, we will *not* be using Ning this year.  
We'll  
> be using Mefeedia, which will be much better for watching,  
> aggregating, commenting and archiving.  We'll have a channel at
> http://mefeedia.com/channels/vlomo08
> 
> And you'll be able to put the feed for that channel into Miro or  
> iTunes or whatever reader or aggregator you choose.
> 
> Mefeedia are sorting this, adding some extra features just for 
us.   
> For free, in the middle of a busy time for them (they've just  
> relaunched the site), so please be patient.  In the next couple of  
> days, you'll be able to go to the channel and add your feed.
> 
> I'll post here and on Twitter as soon as it's fully up and 
running.
> Hurray!
> 
> If you're thinking about joining in and worried about the 
commitment,  
> don't fret it.   Allow yourself half an hour per day and just post  
> some video - any video, however small, on any account.  Doesn't 
have  
> to be what you usually do, or up to any high production 
standards.   
> Join in, it'll make the watching more fun, too.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
>

[videoblogging] Re: Revision 3 cuts back on shows including Epic Fu

[Heath]

They control the programing for the masses, because, as I have said 
again and again, the masses just want to watch TV, good, TV or what 
they perceive as good TV, yes, they may gripe about ads, or quality 
but at the end of the day, they just want to sit down and watch TV.  
If that's on their real TV or on the net, it doesn't matter.

I am hoping that kid with the new distro model shows up fast!

Heath

The artist formally known as "The Batman Geek"

www.?.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Great post.
> 
> On 29-Oct-08, at 8:42 AM, Drew wrote:
> 
> " What concerns me most of all is that we really need companies like
>  > Revision3 to succeed. The independent content creator, and in 
turn,
>  > independent production companies and studios, are really being
>  > overshadowed by the efforts of the Hollywood studios and  
> entertainment
>  > conglomerates. For example, look at the lineups at Digital 
Hollywood
>  > and the NewTeeVee Live conferences -- there was a terrible lack 
of
>  > independent content creators sitting on panels alongside people 
from
>  > LucasFilm and Hulu."
> 
> This is a major concern I have too, maybe the biggest issue on the  
> table.
> 
> I don't really think of Revision3 as independent. They are "new",  
> like a new cable station,
> but they have been trying to emulate an old model of TV and they 
are  
> owned now by
> investors, so their #1 mission is likely to sell to a mainstream  
> entity. This is going to be an
> uphill battle if rumors are true that this setback happened not 
due  
> to an economic
> meltdown, but because they did not receive their next, anticipated  
> round of funding.
> 
> In case anyone didn't notice, the people who you tend to think of 
as  
> independent, like
> Kevin Rose, for instance, has no control whatsoever over the 
company  
> and apparently no
> say even. From his blog post, we can infer that he didn't even 
know  
> about the layoffs until
> he was told by Jim, without discussion. Maybe Kevin should be more  
> involved, that might
> help. Not sure.
> 
> Nevertheless, setting aside Rev3, what is starting to happen is 
that  
> Hulu and iTunes for
> instance are becoming so popular, that they are starting to 
control  
> the programming for
> the masses. ***Hulu is a place where MOST people are not allowed 
to  
> distribute.*** Same
> old game as before. Because Hulu is becoming so popular, it's  
> starting to divide and this is
> destructive not only for independents, but for the future of media 
in  
> general. Why cant
> Hulu continue to curate their favorite content in the same way, 
but  
> allow anyone to
> distribute on a back channel like iTunes? Probably because they  
> believe in a business
> model that will not include open and democratic media. It's their  
> right to be closed, but
> it's a decision that hurts the world for no gain and its gross.
> 
> When people say things like Hulu is for "professional" content 
while  
> YouTube is for "User
> Generated Content", the world is suffering even more and becoming  
> further divided by a
> stark line between the two.
> 
> The biggest threat of all is coming in tandem as Comcast started  
> capping internet plans.
> Anyone who says this wont effect how much we can do online is 
naive.  
> Their first cap-
> plan structure seems somewhat uninhibited right now but this 
doesn't  
> mean they wont
> start tweaking the cap amounts once everyone accepts the reality 
in  
> due time. While its
> easy to compete with CBS and Disney because now we use the same 
open  
> distribution
> channels, it will be hard to compete with Verizon and Comcast, due 
to  
> the amount of
> overhead needed to build out an alternative system. My hope is that 
a  
> teenager will
> singlehandedly invent a new way to transfer data faster, without  
> fiber - one that may cost
> almost nothing in terms of technological infrastructure. I'm  
> certainly not going to sit
> around and wait for that to happen.
> 
> What's to be done? At least a few things, I think:
> 
> #1 Four years ago, I promoted the idea of saving up your coins for 
a  
> year, buckling down,
> and investing in your own video company for a year. At the time, I  
> thought a year would
> be enough but didn't understand how long it would take for a  
> supportive marketplace to
> arise. Now, I'd say is an even better time to do it. If you can 
spend  
> a year, starting right
> now, you may have an advantage due to a weak marketplace and the  
> continuing growth i

[videoblogging] Re: Vote for a name - NaVloPoMo 2008

[Heath]

I personaly like NaVloPoMo just cause I sound so darn sexy saying 
it.

Heath
http://www.?.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I agree.  We need to decide and avoid confusion.   
> Videobloggingmonth2008 is too long, and i hate the word 
videoblogging  
> because of the negative connotations among non-geeks.
> 
> I've created a poll here in the Yahoo Group.  You can each choose 
one  
> or more names.  Vote!
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/surveys?id=2115573
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
> PS We're not using the Ning site this year,  Schlomo, we're going 
to  
> be using a channel at Mefeedia, where we all add our feeds and sit  
> back and watch. And comment.  Or take the channel's feed and put 
it  
> into Miro, or iTunes or Google Reader or whatever.  So we can call 
it  
> whatever we want :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 28-Oct-08, at 11:07 AM, schlomo rabinowitz wrote:
> 
> But it's not my call really. I just want an agreed upon way to  
> facilitate
> the finding/viewing of the month of videos.
> 
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Cheryl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>  > Last year on my "Half Way Day" post, 2 people outside the US 
said  
> they
>  > wished it were named "International" to reflect that we're not 
all in
>  > the US.
>  >
>  > I think "videobloggingmonth2008" is good. Except the tag is so  
> long. I
>  > also like just VloPoMo08 or VloMo08 - but not schlomo08 ;)
>  >
>  > Cheryl
>  >
>  > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com  40yahoogroups.com>,
>  > Rupert  wrote:
>  > >
>  > > Having said all that...
>  > >
>  > > How about just plain old Videoblogging Month?
>  > >
>  > > #videobloggingmonth2008?
>  > >
>  > > Opinions please.
>  > >
>  > > Rupert
>  > > http://twittervlog.tv
>  > >
>  > > On 28-Oct-08, at 9:37 AM, Rupert wrote:
>  > >
>  > > The thing is, it's not Navlopomo in isolation. It springs from
>  > > NaBloPoMo, which itself springs from NaNoWriMo. Both those 
things
>  > > have been going on for years in a very international way, but  
> haven't
>  > > changed their names. Once something gets shortened, I don't  
> think it
>  > > matters what it stands for - it's the aims that count. I 
don't  
> think
>  > > any of the non-US vloggers minded it being NaVloPoMo last year.
>  > >
>  > > And more than anything, I think it'd be confusing to change  
> names at
>  > > this point.
>  > >
>  > > Although if we did, I'd prefer a total change to something that
>  > > doesn't sound so stupid. All my non-geek friends last year 
thought
>  > > that the name was dumb, and got in the way of describing what 
it  
> is.
>  > > I mean, if you're going to have an acronym, make it a nice 
sounding
>  > > short one, and make the name itself punchy. National Blog 
Posting
>  > > Month or National Novel Writing Month just sound lame, let 
alone
>  > > their shortened versions.
>  > >
>  > > If I could do it all again, I'd choose International Month of  
> Online
>  > > Video - IMOV.
>  > >
>  > > Unless there's a big weight of opinion on Twitter or here for 
one
>  > > particular name, though, let's keep it as Navlopomo. If you 
feel
>  > > strongly about doing otherwise, get petitioning!
>  > >
>  > > Rupert
>  > > http://twittervlog.tv
>  > >
>  > > On 28-Oct-08, at 12:26 AM, Cheryl wrote:
>  > >
>  > > Last year there were several comments that it should be called
>  > > International Vlog Posting Month (InVloPoMo) or International  
> Vlogging
>  > > Month (InVloMo). Because so many participants are outside the  
> U.S. Not
>  > > trying to start trouble - just pointing out there's still time 
to
>  > > rechristen it so the name is more inclusive (and possibly 
easier to
>  > > pronounce).
>  > >
>  > > And I'm SO in.
>  > >
>  > > Cheryl
>  > >
>  > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com  40yahoogroups.com>,
>  > Rupert  wrote:
>  > > >
>  > > > Last year, we had around 60 people signed up, and around 30-
40  
> people
>  > > > posted videos regularly. By the end of the month, we'd made 
over
>  > > > 1000 videos

[videoblogging] Revision 3 cuts back on shows including Epic Fu

[Heath]

Just saw this now, probably a bit of old news for some, but sad 
nonethelessSteve and Zadi are great people and I am sure this is a 
kick in the gut in many ways...

http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/10/27/revision3-cuts-back-on-shows-and-
staff/

Hopfully Steve and Zadi knew about this before hand and were making 
some deals..

Heath 
http://batmangeek.com

[videoblogging] Re: McCain on Blip = a Shame

[Heath]

I also love Blip but I I think porn and curse words are filth, so I 
am calling on Blip to remove any videos that have what I consider 
filth on them.  And puppies, puppies are filth too

You can't have it both ways folks....

Heath
http://batmangeek.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Schaap" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Now wait a fucking sec Quirk! What the fuck are u talking about? I 
never implied any kind 
> of censorship! I just wanted to express my disgust with the fact 
that my favorite hosting 
> service, run by a fantastic man like Mike, is helping the McCain 
gang to spread there filth. 
> That's my opinion. Of course these assholes have the right to free 
expression/speech etc. 
> But if I was Mike i would have kindly requested  the McCain 
campaign to find some other 
> hosting service. 
> 
> BTW - I don't know of any speech laws in Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Adam Quirk"  wrote:
> >
> > I have to assume most Americans are as disgusted by this thread 
as I am.
> > Having seen and heard and been influenced by European ideas 
of "speech
> > laws", it fucking sickens me to see discussion of banning or 
censoring
> > certain points of view.
> > 
> > I don't give a fuck if John McCain says that liberal democrats are
> > donkey-fucking satanists and that we as a people have to rise up 
against
> > them to save our culture.
> > 
> > He's allowed to say whatever the fuck he wants. Thank god.
> > 
> > So-called "hate speech" laws in Europe are one of the many 
reasons I'll
> > never move there.
> > 
> > As flawed as my government is, I know for a fact, as predicated 
in the
> > goddamned constitution that I live under, that I can say whatever 
the fuck I
> > want about whomever the fuck I want, whenever, wherever, and to 
whomever I
> > want. I only wish other countries had these rights.
>

[videoblogging] Re: And the winner is.....

[Heath]

The first thing Bill Streeter said to me when I met him was "dude 
you're short"glad to see things never change  ;)

Heath
http://com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "schlomo rabinowitz" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I met the guy who does the history of dance last week.  He was 
showing us
> the his new moves (for part 2).
> He's much shorter in real life!!:)
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Brook Hinton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >   The laughing baby is the only thing on that top 10 list worth 
watching.
> > --
> > ___
> > Brook Hinton
> > film/video/audio art
> > www.brookhinton.com
> > studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Schlomo Rabinowitz
> http://schlomo.tv - finally moving to wordpress
> http://hatfactory.net - relaxed coworking
> AIM:schlomochat
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: External hard drive problems ?

[Heath]

Digital does NOT last foreverI remember reading an article last 
year about some companies who were early adopters in the digital 
realm, CD's, etcand they have found that some data is gone or is 
being corrupted, something to do with the protective film on the CD's 
(if I am remembering correctly)  The point is that at some point all 
data digital or otherwise will fail...nothing last's foreverat 
least not yet

Heath
http://batmangeek.com 

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "humancloner1997" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> That's not "beside the point" at all.  I'm now realizing how fragile
> data is.  My old PC crashed twice in years past.  Since I got my 
Mac a
> couple years ago, I've been splendidly complacent.
> 
> Some friends who work as professional video editors producing
> documentaries for Cable Channels tell me that "every drive 
eventually
> fails".
> 
> Now, they work on them all day, every day.  Do drives "age" & "fail"
> when they are just being used for storage?  Mechanics have told me
> that a car sitting at the curb deteriorates just-as/even-more 
quickly
> than one that's driven a lot.
> 
> It's something I haven't researched.  I've been working with video
> since 1970.  I discovered that even different brands of VHS tape
> differed in their life-expectancy.  (TDK VHS tapes played 20 years
> later while others did not.)
> 
> I know digital images are supposed to "last forever" but none of us
> are going to live long enough to check that declaration out.  I'd 
hate
> to one day go to my "back-up files" and find they had deteriorated.
> 
> One final note, Lacie suggests not using their drive with Time 
Machine
> as a back-up on video files because something in the formatting 
causes
> a lag when they are played.
> 
> Thanks for the thoughts.
> 
> Randolfe Wicker
> Hoboken, NJ
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Terranova  
wrote:
> >
> > Slightly besides the point, but I strongly advise to avoid Lacie
> (each one
> > I¹ve owned has failed)...
> > G-Tech is a much more solid option...
> > 
> >
> //--

> > DAVID TERRANOVA
> > d a v i d t e r r a n o v a . c o m
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > From: Rupert 
> > Reply-To: "videoblogging@yahoogroups.com"
> 
> > Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 08:59:44 -0700
> > To: "videoblogging@yahoogroups.com" 

> > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] External hard drive problems ?
> > 
> >  
> >  
> > 
> > Thanks for this list, Brook - that's really helpful.
> > I've had problems with Lacie drives.  And yet I've still bought 
more.
> > My initial thought about your problem is that given that it 
repeats
> > on all your drives, regardless of manufacturer, it's something to 
do
> > with your computer - your ports or some software problem, or a 
cable,
> > or a setting.
> > 
> > On 16-Sep-08, at 12:31 PM, Brook Hinton wrote:
> > 
> > Make sure the drives are formatted Mac HFS+. Video will not work
> > reliably if
> > they are formatted for both mac and windows, even if they mount.
> > Make sure you have the computer set to never put hard drives to 
sleep in
> > your preferences. (And avoid MyBooks, which ignore this setting).
> > Make sure you never fill the drive up beyond 80%.
> > Make sure every firewire cable is good. They can go bad.
> > Make sure no cable is more than 14.5', Ideally much much shorter,
> > especially
> > if you are using multiple devices.
> > Make sure every firewire device in the chain is on.
> > Make sure every port is good - on the drives AND on the computer.
> > Make sure your video is in a format your software likes.
> > It's a lot of work, but that's the usual firewire troubleshooting
> > list. It's
> > rarely the drive unless you've been unplugging it or turning it 
off
> > without
> > dismounting it.
> > 
> > ___
> > Brook Hinton
> > film/video/audio art
> > www.brookhinton.com
> > studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

[videoblogging] Re: About Comments

[Heath]

I feel like, ,maybe I should clarify my "spam" issue I am having on 
Wordpress.  I have Aiskmet and it works 98% of the time, I really 
only get very few spam comments that get through the sitebut it 
was frustrating for me when I would see on a daily basis where 
Aiskmet would "stop" or catch like 100 spam comments in a day (or 
what it thought was spam in a day.you see I was going through 
each one just to make sure it was really spam because early on, 
Rupert and Robert would for some reason get caught in my spam 
filter(I have no idea why on that one)I just didn't 
understand why so much spam was being directed towards my site and it 
just frustrated me

Well I have learned a few thingsit was only a couple of posts 
that were causing the issue...for some reason the post about the 
Winnies, (the first one) I was getting all kinds of spam from that, 
but as soon as I turned off comments for that postgone(I 
still think it was some sort of plot by Robert Schoble.;)

Anyway, I think it just depends, Aiskmet does do a good job, I just 
hate spam so much that even when it's caught, I hate itI'm anal, 
as anyone who follows me on twitter knows.

So Schlomo keep the comments, it's not that bad.

Heath
http://batmangeek.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "schlomo rabinowitz" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Aww, Rob, you are the bees knees.
> After a week of talking to people, I'm still on the fence.  
Basically,
> people are saying things like "but what if I want to comment?  Why 
wont you
> let me?!" To which I end up saying, "because its my website and 
comments
> have been a pain, and now that I'm moving to Wordpress, its going 
to be even
> worse!"
> 
> Of course, my Mom really didnt understand my reason.
> 
> I guess I'll keep them on when my new site launches and we will see 
what
> happens.  But the amount of "wordpress isnt stopping my spam 
problems" sort
> of talk tell me I'll probably end up stopping them eventually.
> 
> Maybe I should just turn on video comments through Disqus, that way 
if they
> are troll-like comments, at least they may be more entertaining!
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 7:07 PM, Rob Parrish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> 
> >   Dear Schlomo,
> >
> > I've met you just once. And I enjoyed it. Even more, I've enjoyed
> > your videos over the years. If you stop comments, you stop people
> > like me --- not really your friend, not your family, just a guy 
you've
> > crossed paths with --- from communicating with you directly on 
your
> > vlog/videoblog/blog with fucking video/whatever. Sure, sure, you
> > might think, "when was the last time he (me) commented on a 
video." I
> > know it's been awhile. But, hey, I've been busy, and I miss 
fireant
> > like hell -- my old computer runs Miro for shit, and iTunes 
sucks . .
> > . but I've been watching.
> >
> > Ok, so don't do it!
> >
> > Rob
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com ,
> > "schlomo rabinowitz"
> >
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > hey all
> > > Heath started me thinking about comments as I'm about to put up 
my
> > videoblog
> > > redesign (finally) and I'm starting to think that I don't want 
comments
> > > enabled.
> > >
> > > As the years go, and as buddy Merlin puts http://www.43folders.com/2008/09/10/time-attention-creative-work
> > ">here:
> > > " for an endless number of reasons that you've probably seen for
> > yourself
> > > across the web, the quality and care of visitor contributions
> > everywhere has
> > > hit what I truly hope is rock bottom."
> > >
> > > I agree.
> > >
> > > Here's another post that has me thinking about this:
> > > http://shawnblanc.net/2007/why-daring-fireball-is-comment-free/
> > >
> > > There's so many ways for friends and family to let me know that 
they
> > > liked/not liked, that all the other trolling crap doesn't seem 
all that
> > > needed. Maybe because I may drop comments from my videoblog I 
guess
> > it may
> > > just be called a Video Site?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Schlomo Rabinowitz
> > > http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> > > http://hatfactory.net
> > > AIM:schlomochat
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Schlomo Rabinowitz
> http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> http://hatfactory.net
> AIM:schlomochat
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: About Comments

[Heath]

I would hope that you don't turn off commentsI for one go through 
these spells where I do not comment very much, but then I go through 
the same spells where I do.  I think that comments and commenting can 
have a very positive effect on people and sometimes it does spur some 
real conversations.  It's tough, there is a lot of spam and a lot of 
trolling going on and I can understand the desire to turn it offI 
only know that I would miss it and I think on some level you would 
miss it too...the random "hey that was freaking great" or "that was 
cool" on those days when the world has beat you down can make all the 
difference I think.

maybe I will vlog about it  ;)

Heath
http://batmangeek.com


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "schlomo rabinowitz" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> hey all
> Heath started me thinking about comments as I'm about to put up my 
videoblog
> redesign (finally) and I'm starting to think that I don't want 
comments
> enabled.
> 
> As the years go, and as buddy Merlin puts http://www.43folders.com/2008/09/10/time-attention-creative-
work">here:
> " for an endless number of reasons that you've probably seen for 
yourself
> across the web, the quality and care of visitor contributions 
everywhere has
> hit what I truly hope is rock bottom."
> 
> I agree.
> 
> Here's another post that has me thinking about this:
> http://shawnblanc.net/2007/why-daring-fireball-is-comment-free/
> 
> There's so many ways for friends and family to let me know that they
> liked/not liked, that all the other trolling crap doesn't seem all 
that
> needed.  Maybe because I may drop comments from my videoblog I 
guess it may
> just be called a Video Site?
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Schlomo Rabinowitz
> http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> http://hatfactory.net
> AIM:schlomochat
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Two NYTimes articles on Web Video

[Heath]

.wasn't one of the big things about vlogging being able to 'be' 
personal, to talk, to share, to grow

Heath
http://batmangeek.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Sull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> i tend to agree with mister schlomo.
> depends what your "personal videos" are too.
> are they produced, artistic, entertaining, stylistic?
> or are they talking head vids with the primary purpose of basic
> communication?
> if the latter, than i dont know if that can be called an art form.
> it's a video message.
> unless you are being fake.  still, i wouldnt consider it art.
> 
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 4:50 PM, schlomo rabinowitz 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> 
> >   Actually, I think for personal vlogging its even more so that
> > face-to-face
> > interaction helps readership to your blog. Well, that, and just 
being a
> > part of various communities.
> > I would be hard-pressed to think that someone actually watches my 
personal
> > vids without knowing me on some sort of level. Otherwise, why 
would you?
> > My personal videoblog was made primarily for my Mom to keep up 
with me; its
> > something that only friends would really be interested in
> > watching/commenting.
> >
> > The personal revolution is not dead, its just PERSONAL. small, 
intimate.
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Two NYTimes articles on Web Video

[Heath]

I think that works in areas where you have a large vlogging 
community...but I don't see a lot of "hey I was just surfing around 
and found your site" happening much anymore in personal 
vlogging...there is just so much stuff out there...I mean just trying 
to find something new is dauntingI mean just think about it, just 
4 years ago, you could watch every vlog out there, probably in just a 
couple of hours time...if that longNow?!?I have trouble 
keeping up with the 20 or so I watch reguarly...(speaking of which, I 
need to add you to my zune, yes...I said zune) But I hope you are 
right, I hope it will always be on some levelPERSONAL.  ;)

Heath
http://batmangeek.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "schlomo rabinowitz" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Actually, I think for personal vlogging its even more so that face-
to-face
> interaction helps readership to your blog.  Well, that, and just 
being a
> part of various communities.
> I would be hard-pressed to think that someone actually watches my 
personal
> vids without knowing me on some sort of level.  Otherwise, why 
would you?
>  My personal videoblog was made primarily for my Mom to keep up 
with me; its
> something that only friends would really be interested in
> watching/commenting.
> 
> The personal revolution is not dead, its just PERSONAL. small, 
intimate.
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >   I still think it's face to face networking that get's you 
noticed, at
> > least if you are trying to do a show. As far as personal vlogging
> > goes, I really wonder how many people care about that anymore. I
> > mean to watch it and comment on it, etc. I don't see the same fire
> > and desire about personal storytelling as I did when I was first
> > startingI am sure part of that is just how things evolve,
> > etcbutit just seems to have waned
> >
> > Now as far as the convergance of the internet and TV, the answer 
is
> > so simple, it's crazy simple.If I could make it, I would, the 
key
> > is the price point of courseinternet in a box, it's all I'm
> > saying..
> >
> > Heath
> > http://batmangeek.com
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com ,
> > "schlomo rabinowitz"
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > It's sad to say, but the Who You Know will always be a part of 
this
> > business
> > > of entertainment. There are some shows that I think are 
brilliant,
> > but they
> > > just dont know anyone who can help them make their way through 
the
> > economic
> > > landscape.
> > > There are a couple made between the coasts that are great AND 
get
> > noticed.
> > > Like Midwest Teen Sex Show; great stuff and they have gotten a 
lot
> > of press
> > > and job oppourtunites because of their good work.
> > >
> > > There's a reason people move to NY/LA for entertainment work; 
its
> > where the
> > > networking happens and, for myself, thats how I get the better 
jobs
> > I've
> > > had. Face-to-face meeting with people who have work/money to 
give.
> > >
> > > Has the internet and online video specifically changed that all
> > that much?
> > > Or has ole-fashioned Get In Their Face still the preferred model
> > for you
> > > folks on this list? Curious for your thoughts on that.
> > >
> > > The more things change, the more they stay the same. A handshake
> > is still
> > > the best way to meet someone.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Jay dedman  wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > all i know is that I hope the talent ive seen from people here
> > get what
> > > > they
> > > > deserve.
> > > > Wish it wasnt just about who you know.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > Schlomo Rabinowitz
> > > http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> > > http://hatfactory.net
> > > AIM:schlomochat
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Schlomo Rabinowitz
> http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> http://hatfactory.net
> AIM:schlomochat
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Two NYTimes articles on Web Video

[Heath]

I still think it's face to face networking that get's you noticed, at 
least if you are trying to do a show.  As far as personal vlogging 
goes, I really wonder how many people care about that anymore.  I 
mean to watch it and comment on it, etc.  I don't see the same fire 
and desire about personal storytelling as I did when I was first 
startingI am sure part of that is just how things evolve, 
etcbutit just seems to have waned

Now as far as the convergance of the internet and TV, the answer is 
so simple, it's crazy simple.If I could make it, I would, the key 
is the price point of courseinternet in a box, it's all I'm 
saying..

Heath
http://batmangeek.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "schlomo rabinowitz" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's sad to say, but the Who You Know will always be a part of this 
business
> of entertainment.  There are some shows that I think are brilliant, 
but they
> just dont know anyone who can help them make their way through the 
economic
> landscape.
> There are a couple made between the coasts that are great AND get 
noticed.
>  Like Midwest Teen Sex Show; great stuff and they have gotten a lot 
of press
> and job oppourtunites because of their good work.
> 
> There's a reason people move to NY/LA for entertainment work; its 
where the
> networking happens and, for myself, thats how I get the better jobs 
I've
> had.  Face-to-face meeting with people who have work/money to give.
> 
> Has the internet and online video specifically changed that all 
that much?
> Or has ole-fashioned Get In Their Face still the preferred model 
for you
> folks on this list?  Curious for your thoughts on that.
> 
> The more things change, the more they stay the same.  A handshake 
is still
> the best way to meet someone.
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >
> > all i know is that I hope the talent ive seen from people here 
get what
> > they
> > deserve.
> > Wish it wasnt just about who you know.
> >
> >
> > --
> Schlomo Rabinowitz
> http://schlomolog.blogspot.com
> http://hatfactory.net
> AIM:schlomochat
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Open Source survelliance

[Heath]

Well, first off, you gotta go, "well duh", of course police and the 
goverment are going to moniter YT and other sites.Heck they may 
even be monitering this site as wellI mean if you are going to 
put yourself out there in that wayit's going to happen.  It all 
goes back to what you are willing to have "out there".I mean who 
needs illegal wiretaps and survalliece when you make video's telling 
everyone what you want to do.be smart, is all I'm saying

Heath
http://batmangeek.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jay dedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> It's awesome that people can now organize online and be their own 
media.
> But there are also some possible repercussions.
> US authorities seem to watch videos as much as teenage boys.
> 
> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080909-the-revolution-will-
be-streamed-rnc-arrests-rooted-in-youtube.html
> 
> The affidavit, which lays out the basis for the preconvention raid 
on a
> protest group calling itself the Republican National Convention 
Welcoming
> Committee, describes a year-long investigation that ultimately 
involved
> officers from multiple law enforcement agencies infiltrating the 
group to
> monitor its plans. Initially, however, police had merely monitored 
the
> group's Web site to gather "open source" intelligence. The formal
> investigation was launched last August, just two days after police 
noted the
> appearance on the site of a YouTube "trailer" showing "several 
persons
> dressed in 'black bloc' attire" and wielding bolt-cutters, Molotov
> cocktails, and bowling-balls to the soundtrack of Blondie's "One 
Way or
> Another."
> 
> Police also cited the appearance in February of a second online 
video, the
> "Video Map of the St. Paul Points of Interest," which appeared to 
highlight
> potential targets for direct actions. The video was posted by Erik 
Oseland,
> one of six activists now facing terrorism charges under Minnesota's 
version
> of the federal PATRIOT Act. Another of the six, Garrett Fitzgerald, 
was
> identified by an informant as one of the participants in the 
original
> "trailer" video.
> 
> Yet another of the preconvention raids targeted a group whose whole 
raison
> d'être is video production: the I-Witness Video collective. The 
group films
> police/activist interaction during large-scale protests, and 
provided
> evidence that ultimately helped to exonerate hundreds arrested 
during the
> 2004 Republican National Convention in New York.  Over the course 
of this
> year's convention protests, police would make some 800 arrests, and 
the city
> is already bracing for lawsuits.
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Jay and Ryanne interviewed in Beijing on BoingBoing TV

[Heath]

It's not about them having ads, it was just the type of ad...for me 
it broke the flow, it seemed intrusivebut I understand that ads 
are what makes the world go round.....

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "mcmpress" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> As a big news story, that video will be viewed by countless people.
> Advertisers are wise to attach to it. 
> 
> - Mary
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" 
> wrote:
> >
> > I hear what you're saying, but bills have to be paid.  I don't 
know
> > anything about boingboing, so I can't speak for them 
specifically, but
> > that's the game that's being played here.  Get people to click on 
your
> > video, get people to click on your ads, get revenue to pay 
people's
> > salaries.  There's nothing else going on here.
> > 
> > It's like when you make a Ning community. You can make it for 
free if
> > you leave the google ads on your site and lose the use of an 
entire
> > sidebar... or you can pay Ning to make it worth their while to 
ditch
> > the ads and let you use the sidebar.  Lots of people choose to 
make
> > free Ning sites and lots of people choose to watch free boingboing
> > videos with whatever ads you saw on them.
> > 
> > I know you know this already and were just stating facts, :) and I
> > agree with you for the most part.  The thing that SUCKS for me 
with
> > overlay ads is that you don't know when they're going to come up, 
so
> > as the content creator, when you go to font someone in THE LOWER 
3RD
> > OF THE SCREEN, some bullshit ad comes up over your title and the
> > effect you were creating as art is completely lost.  If that's the
> > only time you mention someone's name/title in the piece, people 
are in
> > the dark the whole time.
> > 
> > Also, like you said, overlay ads of ANY kind destroy immersion, 
but
> > like I said, it's about making your money back, not making art 
that is
> > poignant and has the desired effect on the viewer that the artist
> > (content creator) intended.
> > 
> > Removing ads would defeat the purpose of doing the videos in the 
first
> > place. (Again, having nothing specifically to do with boingboing)
> > 
> > Bill Cammack
> > http://billcammack.com
> > 
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Heath"  wrote:
> > >
> > > I am glad jay and ryanne are back safe, I am glad that boing 
boing 
> > > and others are trying to report thingsbutand for me 
it's a 
> > > big butthe ads on the video piece from boing boing turned 
me 
> > > offI mean, here are jay and ryanne talking about people 
being 
> > > detained and how that they are basicly trying to get out of 
town 
> > > before they themselves are detained and I get some upbeat 
rockin ad 
> > > for, heck I don't even know but it just seemed sooo out of 
> > > placeit detracted me from the overall message...maybe it's 
just 
> > > me...but.
> > > 
> > > Heath
> > > http://batmangeek.com
> > > http://heathparks.com
> > > 
> > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > http://tv.boingboing.net/2008/08/25/boing-boing-tv-proti.html
> > > > 
> > > > "Last week, eight American citizens were detained in Beijing 
for  
> > > > participating in pro-Tibetan sovereignty protests near the 
site of  
> > > > the 2008 Olympics, with Students for a Free Tibet. Two 
> > > videobloggers  
> > > > who documented those protest and guerrilla art installations 
> > > evaded  
> > > > detention, and spoke to Boing Boing TV on Friday Beijing time 
> > > about  
> > > > why they were there, what they witnessed, and why it mattered.
> > > > 
> > > > "Jay Dedman and Ryanne Hodson of Ryanishungry.com spoke to us 
over  
> > > > Skype from a hostel in Beijing. One of the actions they 
documented 
> > > in  
> > > > photo and video was the hanging of an "LED throwies" light 
banner,  
> > > > below, which read "FREE TIBET." We agreed to hold this Boing 
Boing 
> > > tv  
> > > > episode until after we received word that they'd safely left 
the  
> > > > country. They have returned home, so I am posting the piece 
today."
> > > > 
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[videoblogging] Re: Jay and Ryanne interviewed in Beijing on BoingBoing TV

[Heath]

It's funny I didn't even notice the ad's DURING the interview just 
the one's before and afterI was too distracked by the blonde to 
notice the overlays..  ;)  

Another thing that is funny for me, is that I have always been in 
the "ad's arn't so bad" campI know it's still the model and for 
the most part I don't mind them, I ingnore most of them actually...so 
for me to say "ads are wrong here" is to me a bit funny in 
itselfI really do think it's because I know Jay and Ryanne and 
knowing what "could" have happened and to be honest what 
could "still" happencause I am sure their names are on some list 
now in China

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well, like I said, I agree with you entirely.  I was "shocked" 
enough
> just reading the twitter or link here or whatever that informed me
> that they had been over there AT ALL.  I thought they were in the
> sticks somewhere making bread and not using plastic.  When I read 
the
> link, I was like "THEY could have been caught up in it TOO? :O".
> 
> So, yeah, when I went to the video, it had extra import, gloom and
> doom for me because at the time they recorded it, they still could
> have gotten busted.  Ads, of course, are going to pull me out of 
that
> feeling, so they're certainly unwanted... as far as the "art" of the
> piece.
> 
> As far as what kind of ads they might have served on it, that's an
> interesting point.  Unless boingboing does a consistently "gloom and
> doom" category of videos, there's no reason for them to have
> specifically targeted videos to specific videos.  Like, there's no
> reason that their audience watching THIS video would have been
> different from the audience that watches the rest of their videos,
> whatever they're about.  So while I agree that the ads could have 
been
> more in tune with the mood of the individual video, at this point, I
> don't think it's feasible to tell an advertiser "We're going to do 
one
> solemn video out of 100, maybe... so pay us to advertise your 
product
> once in a blue moon".
> 
> Bill Cammack
> http://billcammack.com
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Heath"  wrote:
> >
> > Oh indeed I do know that is the nature of the "biz" but I can't 
help 
> > but think, maybe an ad for not smoking or maybe a company that is 
> > doing "green" or social things, etc...maybe that would have been 
a 
> > better fit than the ad that was on there...again I know the 
realility 
> > but for me this was the first time it really hit me...maybe it's 
> > because I know Jay and Ryanne, I don't know...but...  
> > 
> > Heath
> > http://batmangeek.com
> > http://heathparks.com
> > 
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > I hear what you're saying, but bills have to be paid.  I don't 
know
> > > anything about boingboing, so I can't speak for them 
specifically, 
> > but
> > > that's the game that's being played here.  Get people to click 
on 
> > your
> > > video, get people to click on your ads, get revenue to pay 
people's
> > > salaries.  There's nothing else going on here.
> > > 
> > > It's like when you make a Ning community. You can make it for 
free 
> > if
> > > you leave the google ads on your site and lose the use of an 
entire
> > > sidebar... or you can pay Ning to make it worth their while to 
ditch
> > > the ads and let you use the sidebar.  Lots of people choose to 
make
> > > free Ning sites and lots of people choose to watch free 
boingboing
> > > videos with whatever ads you saw on them.
> > > 
> > > I know you know this already and were just stating facts, :) 
and I
> > > agree with you for the most part.  The thing that SUCKS for me 
with
> > > overlay ads is that you don't know when they're going to come 
up, so
> > > as the content creator, when you go to font someone in THE 
LOWER 3RD
> > > OF THE SCREEN, some bullshit ad comes up over your title and the
> > > effect you were creating as art is completely lost.  If that's 
the
> > > only time you mention someone's name/title in the piece, people 
are 
> > in
> > > the dark the whole time.
> > > 
> > > Also, like you said, overlay ads of ANY kind destroy immersio

[videoblogging] Re: Jay and Ryanne interviewed in Beijing on BoingBoing TV

[Heath]

Oh indeed I do know that is the nature of the "biz" but I can't help 
but think, maybe an ad for not smoking or maybe a company that is 
doing "green" or social things, etc...maybe that would have been a 
better fit than the ad that was on there...again I know the realility 
but for me this was the first time it really hit me...maybe it's 
because I know Jay and Ryanne, I don't know...but...  

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I hear what you're saying, but bills have to be paid.  I don't know
> anything about boingboing, so I can't speak for them specifically, 
but
> that's the game that's being played here.  Get people to click on 
your
> video, get people to click on your ads, get revenue to pay people's
> salaries.  There's nothing else going on here.
> 
> It's like when you make a Ning community. You can make it for free 
if
> you leave the google ads on your site and lose the use of an entire
> sidebar... or you can pay Ning to make it worth their while to ditch
> the ads and let you use the sidebar.  Lots of people choose to make
> free Ning sites and lots of people choose to watch free boingboing
> videos with whatever ads you saw on them.
> 
> I know you know this already and were just stating facts, :) and I
> agree with you for the most part.  The thing that SUCKS for me with
> overlay ads is that you don't know when they're going to come up, so
> as the content creator, when you go to font someone in THE LOWER 3RD
> OF THE SCREEN, some bullshit ad comes up over your title and the
> effect you were creating as art is completely lost.  If that's the
> only time you mention someone's name/title in the piece, people are 
in
> the dark the whole time.
> 
> Also, like you said, overlay ads of ANY kind destroy immersion, but
> like I said, it's about making your money back, not making art that 
is
> poignant and has the desired effect on the viewer that the artist
> (content creator) intended.
> 
> Removing ads would defeat the purpose of doing the videos in the 
first
> place. (Again, having nothing specifically to do with boingboing)
> 
> Bill Cammack
> http://billcammack.com
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Heath"  wrote:
> >
> > I am glad jay and ryanne are back safe, I am glad that boing 
boing 
> > and others are trying to report thingsbutand for me it's 
a 
> > big butthe ads on the video piece from boing boing turned me 
> > offI mean, here are jay and ryanne talking about people being 
> > detained and how that they are basicly trying to get out of town 
> > before they themselves are detained and I get some upbeat rockin 
ad 
> > for, heck I don't even know but it just seemed sooo out of 
> > placeit detracted me from the overall message...maybe it's 
just 
> > me...but.
> > 
> > Heath
> > http://batmangeek.com
> > http://heathparks.com
> > 
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert  wrote:
> > >
> > > http://tv.boingboing.net/2008/08/25/boing-boing-tv-proti.html
> > > 
> > > "Last week, eight American citizens were detained in Beijing 
for  
> > > participating in pro-Tibetan sovereignty protests near the site 
of  
> > > the 2008 Olympics, with Students for a Free Tibet. Two 
> > videobloggers  
> > > who documented those protest and guerrilla art installations 
> > evaded  
> > > detention, and spoke to Boing Boing TV on Friday Beijing time 
> > about  
> > > why they were there, what they witnessed, and why it mattered.
> > > 
> > > "Jay Dedman and Ryanne Hodson of Ryanishungry.com spoke to us 
over  
> > > Skype from a hostel in Beijing. One of the actions they 
documented 
> > in  
> > > photo and video was the hanging of an "LED throwies" light 
banner,  
> > > below, which read "FREE TIBET." We agreed to hold this Boing 
Boing 
> > tv  
> > > episode until after we received word that they'd safely left 
the  
> > > country. They have returned home, so I am posting the piece 
today."
> > > 
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>

[videoblogging] Re: Jay and Ryanne interviewed in Beijing on BoingBoing TV

[Heath]

I am glad jay and ryanne are back safe, I am glad that boing boing 
and others are trying to report thingsbutand for me it's a 
big butthe ads on the video piece from boing boing turned me 
offI mean, here are jay and ryanne talking about people being 
detained and how that they are basicly trying to get out of town 
before they themselves are detained and I get some upbeat rockin ad 
for, heck I don't even know but it just seemed sooo out of 
placeit detracted me from the overall message...maybe it's just 
me...but.

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> http://tv.boingboing.net/2008/08/25/boing-boing-tv-proti.html
> 
> "Last week, eight American citizens were detained in Beijing for  
> participating in pro-Tibetan sovereignty protests near the site of  
> the 2008 Olympics, with Students for a Free Tibet. Two 
videobloggers  
> who documented those protest and guerrilla art installations 
evaded  
> detention, and spoke to Boing Boing TV on Friday Beijing time 
about  
> why they were there, what they witnessed, and why it mattered.
> 
> "Jay Dedman and Ryanne Hodson of Ryanishungry.com spoke to us over  
> Skype from a hostel in Beijing. One of the actions they documented 
in  
> photo and video was the hanging of an "LED throwies" light banner,  
> below, which read "FREE TIBET." We agreed to hold this Boing Boing 
tv  
> episode until after we received word that they'd safely left the  
> country. They have returned home, so I am posting the piece today."
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Do you trust what you see?

[Heath]

Of course it's subjective of the person taking the video or picture, 
etcthat holds true...however, I think it was always 
a "spin"...sure there were times, but people expected more out of the 
people who were delivering the news, in whatever form.  Now we have 
all become so jaded that we seem to always distrust what we see, 
unless it fits your own personal view, then you belive it.  
Objectivity in all it's forms have seem to have gone awayand 
that's sad...

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes.  I agree that the person who delivers the information has to be
> credible and considered honest by the viewers if the station wants
> their information to be accepted and absorbed.  This includes the
> commercials.
> 
> I suppose my point is that even if you take what appears to be the
> purest form of video... a live, unedited stream... it's still
> subjective and contingent upon human decision-making, so it always
> ends up being a reflection of what the person in charge of releasing
> the video wanted to portray.
> 
> For instance, if a film crew takes a trip to Africa and visits 
actual
> huts in villages, yet they actually STAYED in a hotel in a major 
city,
> they're going to cut the video to represent whatever they wanted to
> show.  Shots inside the plush hotels might hit the cutting room 
floor.
>  Shots of the huts with the city's skyline as the background might 
hit
> the cutting room floor.
> 
> I could go film in Central Park right now, and depending on how I do
> it, you wouldn't know it was in the middle of New York City,
> surrounded by high-rise buildings.  OR... I could stand inside the
> park and frame my shot so ONLY the high-rise buildings are shown, 
and
> you wouldn't have any idea that I was standing inside a park when I
> filmed that.
> 
> So I'm not saying that everything's deliberately tainted, though
> there's certainly a lot of content that IS purposely crafted 
to "sell"
> something to an audience.  I'm saying that since it's humans that 
are
> selecting the footage and essentially CREATING the story from the
> sights and sounds, the final product is going to be affected by 
their
> perception of what they want it to portray.
> 
> Bill Cammack
> http://billcammack.com
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Heath"  wrote:
> >
> > But if you know what the spin is or the person who is giving you 
the 
> > information, I think that helpsI do think people at one time 
> > trusted certain, newspeople, newspaper's etcI think for a 
variety 
> > of reasons that trust is going away, but I do think it can come 
> > backhopefully
> > 
> > Heath
> > http://batmangeek.com
> > http://heathparks.com
> > 
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" 
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Nothing's believable, really.
> > > 
> > > Even if information isn't being deliberately altered, it's 
being 
> > spun
> > > most of the time for the sake of making some particular point.
> > > 
> > > For instance, when I take pictures, I take pictures of myself, 
my
> > > friends and my acquaintances.  Therefore, if you see the set of 
> > pics,
> > > you get an impression of the party or meetup that's skewed, 
because 
> > I
> > > didn't take pictures of everyone there.  My goal wasn't to 
document
> > > the party, objectively.  My goal was to document the good times 
I 
> > had
> > > and the people I had them with.  So it's basically a spin.
> > > 
> > > Same thing with news reporting.  You can interview 20 people 
and 
> > have
> > > 10 of them respond positively to something and ten of them 
respond
> > > negatively, and depending on what point you're trying to make, 
the
> > > final video has 5 people 'pro' and only one person 'con', 
making it
> > > look like the vast majority of people polled responded 
positively.
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately, you can't trust media any more than you can 
trust the
> > > person that created the media or was in charge of Executive 
> > Producing
> > > it and signing off on it before it goes out the door.
> > > 
> > > <http://billcammack.com/2008/03/06/295-reelsolidtv-s03-ep013-
how-to-
> > properly-color-correct-a-presidential-candidate/>
> > > 
> > > Bill Cammack
> > > http://billcammac

[videoblogging] Re: Do you trust what you see?

[Heath]

But if you know what the spin is or the person who is giving you the 
information, I think that helpsI do think people at one time 
trusted certain, newspeople, newspaper's etcI think for a variety 
of reasons that trust is going away, but I do think it can come 
backhopefully

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Cammack" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Nothing's believable, really.
> 
> Even if information isn't being deliberately altered, it's being 
spun
> most of the time for the sake of making some particular point.
> 
> For instance, when I take pictures, I take pictures of myself, my
> friends and my acquaintances.  Therefore, if you see the set of 
pics,
> you get an impression of the party or meetup that's skewed, because 
I
> didn't take pictures of everyone there.  My goal wasn't to document
> the party, objectively.  My goal was to document the good times I 
had
> and the people I had them with.  So it's basically a spin.
> 
> Same thing with news reporting.  You can interview 20 people and 
have
> 10 of them respond positively to something and ten of them respond
> negatively, and depending on what point you're trying to make, the
> final video has 5 people 'pro' and only one person 'con', making it
> look like the vast majority of people polled responded positively.
> 
> Unfortunately, you can't trust media any more than you can trust the
> person that created the media or was in charge of Executive 
Producing
> it and signing off on it before it goes out the door.
> 
> <http://billcammack.com/2008/03/06/295-reelsolidtv-s03-ep013-how-to-
properly-color-correct-a-presidential-candidate/>
> 
> Bill Cammack
> http://billcammack.com
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Heath"  wrote:
> >
> > Interesting article today about photojournalism, but I think it 
also 
> > applies to video as well.  I always think about criminal cases, 
when 
> > does someone alter a digital photo to achive their desired 
results?  
> > This is the stuff that scares me about technology, especiality 
> > digital tech
> > 
> > http://www.newsweek.com/id/152989
> > 
> > When a mysterious creature washed up on the shores of Montauk, 
N.Y., 
> > in late July, it became an instant media sensation. After the 
> > photograph of the Montauk Monster ran on Manhattan media blog 
Gawker, 
> > local Long Island newspapers were on the story. CNN and Fox News 
> > quickly followed, hosting experts to hash out what exactly this 
> > unrecognizeable being was. Perhaps a bloated raccoon, as Discover 
> > Magazine claimed and Jeff Corwin told Fox? A dead dog that had 
> > decayed for weeks? Or, the latest spin: The creature was simply 
fake, 
> > a prop in a movie's viral marketing campaign, and the media had 
been 
> > duped. 
> > 
> > The public's skepticism over whether or not they can believe what 
> > they see in photographs isn't unwarranted. Just last week, 
Beijing 
> > organizers admitted to using "previously recorded footage" and 
> > computerized images during the Olympic opening ceremony to 
enhance 
> > the quality of fireworks for broadcast on television. A month 
before 
> > that, a doctored photograph of Iranian missiles turned up on 
front 
> > pages across the globe. The alteration�an extra missile added 
to the 
> > image�was outed within hours of the photograph's 
publication. "With 
> > technology, you can make the moment anything you want it to be," 
says 
> > John Long, the ethics committee chair for the National Press 
> > Photographers Association. "Our credibility has been stretched in 
so 
> > many ways, so I don't think the public has a great deal of faith 
in 
> > us." He admits the past year hasn't been the best for 
> > photojournalism's credibility but doesn't think the future is 
> > particularly gloomy�it just puts the burden on the 
photojournalist to 
> > tell the truth, rather than on the photograph itself. "Just like 
we 
> > trust the reporter to represent what they see accurately, we're 
going 
> > to have to develop that same relationship with photographers," he 
> > says. NEWSWEEK's Sarah Kliff spoke with Long about why the 
> > credibility of photojournalism has fallen, whether or not 
doctored 
> > photographs are more likely to get caught these days, and how 
> > photographers can reclaim the public's trust. Excerpts:
> > 
> > for the rest of the article follow the link 
> > http://www.newsweek.com/id/152989
> > 
> > Heath
> > http://batmangeek.com
> > http://heathparks.com
> >
>

[videoblogging] Do you trust what you see?

[Heath]

Interesting article today about photojournalism, but I think it also 
applies to video as well.  I always think about criminal cases, when 
does someone alter a digital photo to achive their desired results?  
This is the stuff that scares me about technology, especiality 
digital tech

http://www.newsweek.com/id/152989

When a mysterious creature washed up on the shores of Montauk, N.Y., 
in late July, it became an instant media sensation. After the 
photograph of the Montauk Monster ran on Manhattan media blog Gawker, 
local Long Island newspapers were on the story. CNN and Fox News 
quickly followed, hosting experts to hash out what exactly this 
unrecognizeable being was. Perhaps a bloated raccoon, as Discover 
Magazine claimed and Jeff Corwin told Fox? A dead dog that had 
decayed for weeks? Or, the latest spin: The creature was simply fake, 
a prop in a movie's viral marketing campaign, and the media had been 
duped. 

The public's skepticism over whether or not they can believe what 
they see in photographs isn't unwarranted. Just last week, Beijing 
organizers admitted to using "previously recorded footage" and 
computerized images during the Olympic opening ceremony to enhance 
the quality of fireworks for broadcast on television. A month before 
that, a doctored photograph of Iranian missiles turned up on front 
pages across the globe. The alteration—an extra missile added to the 
image—was outed within hours of the photograph's publication. "With 
technology, you can make the moment anything you want it to be," says 
John Long, the ethics committee chair for the National Press 
Photographers Association. "Our credibility has been stretched in so 
many ways, so I don't think the public has a great deal of faith in 
us." He admits the past year hasn't been the best for 
photojournalism's credibility but doesn't think the future is 
particularly gloomy—it just puts the burden on the photojournalist to 
tell the truth, rather than on the photograph itself. "Just like we 
trust the reporter to represent what they see accurately, we're going 
to have to develop that same relationship with photographers," he 
says. NEWSWEEK's Sarah Kliff spoke with Long about why the 
credibility of photojournalism has fallen, whether or not doctored 
photographs are more likely to get caught these days, and how 
photographers can reclaim the public's trust. Excerpts:

for the rest of the article follow the link 
http://www.newsweek.com/id/152989

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

[videoblogging] Re: Video Goes Underground

[Heath]

I agree Rupert, but honestly I was just responding to Jay's post in 
the context of trolls, not about John...or his videojust to 
clairify....

Heath

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't know.  Discussing trolling in this thread makes it sound 
like  
> John's a troll - and I don't think this video is trolling.
> 
> It's an ad hominem polemic, sure - and one that steps way over the  
> line that I would draw if I were making a video about something 
like  
> this.
> 
> And it started a discussion, in which he has been clear and 
reasoned  
> in text.
> 
> I hate trolling and flaming, but this is slightly different I think.
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv/
> 
> On 7-Aug-08, at 12:42 PM, Heath wrote:
> 
> The problem Jay, is that's it's NOT just about leaving comments that
> are mean or untruecalling someone and threathing them, making
> death threats, ruining your creditthose are things people just
> dont "get over it" Those are crimal acts.
> 
> Words DO hurt, it's been proven time and time again, they have power
> and not just the power you allow them to have. And I know that you
> know that
> 
> Heath
> http://batmangeek.com
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jay dedman" 
> wrote:
>  >
>  > On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 7:31 PM, Jeffrey Taylor
> 
>  > wrote:
>  > > Well.
>  > > Kathy Sierra's stalkertrolls called it "art".
>  > > That is all.
>  >
>  > Really good article on Trolls in the NYTimes magazine last week:
>  > http://bit.ly/2r7sUf
>  > Really good read.
>  >
>  > I know I've allowed trolls to painfully get to me before.
>  > Interesting how this one guy explains where he gets his power:
>  >
>  > Fortuny proceeded to demonstrate his personal cure for trolling,
> the Theory
>  > of the Green Hair.
>  >
>  > "You have green hair," he told me. "Did you know that?"
>  >
>  > "No," I said.
>  >
>  > "Why not?"
>  >
>  > "I look in the mirror. I see my hair is black."
>  >
>  > "That's uh, interesting. I guess you understand that you have 
green
> hair
>  > about as well as you understand that you're a terrible reporter."
>  >
>  > "What do you mean? What did I do?"
>  >
>  > "That's a very interesting reaction," Fortuny said. "Why didn't 
you
> get so
>  > defensive when I said you had green hair?" If I were certain 
that I
> wasn't a
>  > terrible reporter, he explained, I would have laughed the
> suggestion off
>  > just as easily. The willingness of trolling "victims" to be hurt 
by
> words,
>  > he argued, makes them complicit, and trolling will end as soon as
> we all get
>  > over it.
>  >
>  > Jay
>  >
>  > --
>  > http://jaydedman.com
>  > 917 371 6790
>  >
>  >
>  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>  >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Video Goes Underground

[Heath]

The problem Jay, is that's it's NOT just about leaving comments that 
are mean or untruecalling someone and threathing them, making 
death threats, ruining your creditthose are things people just 
dont "get over it"  Those are crimal acts.

Words DO hurt, it's been proven time and time again, they have power 
and not just the power you allow them to have.  And I know that you 
know that

Heath
http://batmangeek.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jay dedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 7:31 PM, Jeffrey Taylor 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Well.
> > Kathy Sierra's stalkertrolls called it "art".
> > That is all.
> 
> Really good article on Trolls in the NYTimes magazine last week:
> http://bit.ly/2r7sUf
> Really good read.
> 
> I know I've allowed trolls to painfully get to me before.
> Interesting how this one guy explains where he gets his power:
> 
> Fortuny proceeded to demonstrate his personal cure for trolling, 
the Theory
> of the Green Hair.
> 
> "You have green hair," he told me. "Did you know that?"
> 
> "No," I said.
> 
> "Why not?"
> 
> "I look in the mirror. I see my hair is black."
> 
> "That's uh, interesting. I guess you understand that you have green 
hair
> about as well as you understand that you're a terrible reporter."
> 
> "What do you mean? What did I do?"
> 
> "That's a very interesting reaction," Fortuny said. "Why didn't you 
get so
> defensive when I said you had green hair?" If I were certain that I 
wasn't a
> terrible reporter, he explained, I would have laughed the 
suggestion off
> just as easily. The willingness of trolling "victims" to be hurt by 
words,
> he argued, makes them complicit, and trolling will end as soon as 
we all get
> over it.
> 
> Jay
> 
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Video Goes Underground

[Heath]

And I'm not sure I would call it art(shrug)

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I thought you and Zadi would go apeshit when you saw it.  I know  
> Cheryl's video earlier in the year upset you guys, and it was a 
lot  
> more of a reasoned 'call bullshit' (even if wrong) than this.  If  
> someone did this to me, I might respect their right to do it as an  
> artist, but you can be pretty sure they wouldn't get such a calm,  
> well-reasoned reply.
> 
> 
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
> 
> On 5-Aug-08, at 11:48 PM, Steve Woolf wrote:
> 
> If I wanted to, I could choose to view John's masturbation
> scene, overlaid with my wife's name and followed by a video of her, 
as
> something that should warrant a physical confrontation.
> 
> That success has not come at the expense of other content 
creators,  
> at least in my opinion. In fact, I think we have all done quite a 
lot  
> to help elevate awareness for independent artists.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Rocketboom and Sony

[Heath]

You do understand I WANT personal vlogging and indie content to rule, 
right?  I mean it's why I vlog.haven't seen your video yet, will 
check it out when I get home....

Heath
http://batmangeek.com


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "ractalfece" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What a hoax, this online video revolution.  I thought it was 
supposed
> to be a new media world where you could get unlimited niche stuff 
for
> any niche itch.  And all the niche content creators were supposed to
> have an easy time in this new landscape.  It was supposed to be the
> giants who fell.  It was a "revolution" right?  
> 
> So why is it that "unless you were one of the first few
> or you have a strong plan, time, talent, etcindie content or
> personal vlogging, I don't think will sustain over the long term"?
> 
> I talk about it in my new 39 minute video.  I'm forwarding the 
torrent
> to your email.  But here's my short answer:  It's because people 
don't
> seem to understand, if they don't pay for the shit they enjoy, 
someone
> else is going to pay to have shit spoon fed to them.  It's just the
> way the market works.  
> 
> - [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
> 
> 
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Heath"  wrote:
> >
> > Just saw this..First off congrats to Andrew and Joanne.  
> > Second.this just confirms my belief that online content will 
> > become more and more professional (ie, networks creating stuff or 
> > making stuff availible online), unless you were one of the first 
few 
> > or you have a strong plan, time, talent, etcindie content or 
> > personal vlogging, I don't think will sustain over the long term, 
not 
> > at it's current level anyway.  anywayinteresting read!
> > 
> > Heath
> > http://batmangeek.com
> >
>

[videoblogging] Rocketboom and Sony

[Heath]

Just saw this..First off congrats to Andrew and Joanne.  
Second.this just confirms my belief that online content will 
become more and more professional (ie, networks creating stuff or 
making stuff availible online), unless you were one of the first few 
or you have a strong plan, time, talent, etcindie content or 
personal vlogging, I don't think will sustain over the long term, not 
at it's current level anyway.  anywayinteresting read!

Heath
http://batmangeek.com

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-10007032-36.html?
tag=cnetfd.blogs.item

Sony Pictures Television has signed a distribution deal with 
pioneering Web series Rocketboom, which has been producing a quirky 
daily newscast since 2004.

Under the terms of the agreement--which reports pin in the seven 
figures--Sony will handle all distribution and ad sales, as well as 
use its Crackle.com player on the Rocketboom.com Web site. (Until 
this point, Rocketboom has used a YouTube embed on its home page.) 
It'll also see additional distribution on Sony's network, which 
includes the PlayStation 3 console.

Sony bought Crackle, then known as Grouper, back in 2006.

Created by entrepreneur Andrew Baron, Rocketboom rose to fame with 
actress Amanda Congdon as host, but she left the show on unfavorable 
terms in 2006 and has since struggled to find a new niche in online 
media. Congdon's replacement, Joanne Colan, is still at the helm.

In a post on his blog, Baron explained why he chose to seek a 
distributor (a rarity in the Web video world) rather than raising the 
money through a venture round: he didn't want to sell out. Mentioning 
venture-funded video start-ups like Revision3 and Next New Networks, 
he wrote, "While these networks have provided immense value for the 
growing transitioning space, they are all controlled now by venture 
capitalists which tend to have as their primary objective, a sale."

Baron added that it often hasn't helped the quality. "Aside from the 
hit shows which have spawned the networks, most of the other shows on 
these networks have not lived up to their predecessors, content-wise, 
and new shows are often canceled soon after they are launched." 
Indeed, Revision3 and Next New Networks have both seen new programs 
debut only to peter out after only a few episodes--something that a 
major TV network can handle, but which can be a serious wound for a 
video start-up.

"Instead of gaining capital to burn while continuing to build or seek 
an advertising solution, we now have one of the most prominent 
advertising solutions out there," Baron wrote, "along with increased 
distribution, a road map for expansion and a guarantee that I believe 
is an unprecedented deal for this space."

What he was saying, albeit obliquely, is that Rocketboom did need a 
leg up. As more and more early Web video shows have either faded away 
(Lonelygirl15 just ended its run, and The Burg's creators ended the 
project to collaborate on a new show backed by former Disney chief 
Michael Eisner) or acquired (Wallstrip was bought by CBS Interactive, 
and Revision3 now syndicates Wine Library and Epic Fu) 
remaining "indie" operations need to stay afloat. Sony can provide 
Rocketboom with better exposure as well as a more streamlined 
advertising operation.

Baron is no stranger to shaking things up, having catalyzed one of 
the blogosphere's most navel-gazing debates when he briefly put his 
Twitter account up for sale on eBay.

[videoblogging] Re: Things are changing for real.....(?)

[Heath]

I'm surprised it got this far as well, but I still worry.they may 
not be able to block traffic but I do see the day when we are paying 
for what we download and I see the Verizon's, comcast, time warner, 
AT&T etc somehow making their own content exempt from the bandwith 
consumption and making deals with other content providers who only 
produce professional content and that will all but kill user gen 
content

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jay dedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Im pretty surprised by the sequence of events.
> A year ago, some bloggers in the P2P world started complaining 
because it
> seemed that Comcast was blocking bit torrent traffic.
> The web communities started discussing it, testing the hypothesis, 
and
> proved it to be true.
> I remember we had some hot and heavy debates about Comcast's 
actions.
> 
> 
http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2008/07/portfolio_0711
> 
> > "The sanctions would be the first time the commission has come 
down on an
> > internet provider for denying consumers the right to open, 
unfettered
> > internet access. It may set a precedent on how the federal 
government
> > oversees management of internet traffic flows in the future."
> >
> 
> Honestly, i thought Comcast would get away with iteven make it 
into a
> new policy banning bit torrent universally.
> Isn't bit torrent just used for pirated material?
> Bit torrent users are like drug dealers, right?
> 
> But it seems that everyone from all across the spectrum understand 
that
> companies cannot pick and choose what goes over the networks.
> There must be neutrality and transparency.
> In fact, this whole incident has been a great example of why we 
need Net
> Neutrality legislation...whereas before it was just abstract 
discussions.
> 
> the FCC ruling on Comcast is not a done deal, but I'm amazed it 
even got
> this far.
> maybe web communities really are progressing and becoming a 
powerful force
> in how things are done (at least in the USA).
> 
> Jay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://jaydedman.com
> 917 371 6790
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[videoblogging] Re: Preventing embedded videos from playing automatically on Myspace message boards

[Heath]

No worries Charles,   ;)

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Charles HOPE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> We have just now put out a fix for this bug, so the problems should 
be clearing 
> up at once.  Sorry for the inconveniences!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heath wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > My stuff on Myspace from blip auto plays as well. It's the player
> > that you can embed into your site. It's started a while ago, I 
just
> > never did anything about it. But I know it's also happening to me.
> > 
> > Heath
> > http://batmangeek.com <http://batmangeek.com>
> > http://heathparks.com <http://heathparks.com>
> > 
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
> > <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jan McLaughlin"
> >  wrote:
> >  >
> >  > In a situation like that, I would say calling Mr. Hudack on 
his cell
> >  > might be in order. That is, if it's really a Blip issue - but 
based
> >  > upon what you've described, I don't think it is.
> >  >
> >  > What you describe sounds very strange.
> >  >
> >  > Know there's an autoplay option in Blip's show player 
configuration
> >  > process but can't imagine that even changing that option could 
cause
> >  > autoplay across extant Blip embed code and/or players 
everywhere.
> >  >
> >  > When you upload to MySpace, those videos aren't hosted @ Blip, 
but
> > at
> >  > MySpace, so deleting the Blip files wouldn't affect how your 
MySpace
> >  > vids autoplayed (or not).
> >  >
> >  > MySpace deleted all the videos I'd embedded in it and I can't 
for
> > the
> >  > life of me figure out how to re-do it.
> >  >
> >  > My best guess is that the problem is with MySpace, not Blip.
> >  >
> >  > Blip's cross-post to MySpace has been broken for a while - 
since
> >  > MySpace altered something-or-other.
> >  >
> >  > MySpace deleted the half dozen or so videos that were on my 
profile.
> >  > Ack. Not very video friendly.
> >  >
> >  > Jan
> >  >
> >  > On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 4:37 PM, duckpondpotter 

> > wrote:
> >  > >
> >  > > I recently had an incident where many of the videos I had
> > embedded on
> >  > > Myspace message boards from Blip Tv had started playing
> > automatically.
> >  > > This had the extremely undesirable effect of fouling the 
audio
> > on the
> >  > > homepage. We are making a documentary of the music scene in 
and
> > around
> >  > > our pottery shop, and the video posts, which were mainly 
musical
> >  > > performances, were placed on the sites of musicians who were
> > friends
> >  > > with the people in the videos. When our videos started 
playing
> >  > > automatically, we suddenly were flooded with angry 
complaints from
> >  > > musicians that our videos were messing up their pages.
> > AHH!!! We
> >  > > had inadvertently become Spamers!!! I immediately deleted my
> > videos
> >  > > from Blip and e-mailed their staff for a solution to this. I
> > also put
> >  > > out a bulletin in Myspace explaining and apologizing for the
> > problem.
> >  > > Embedding video can be a great way to build an audience, but 
this
> >  > > problem is suddenly making us more enemies than fans. I'm 
hoping
> >  > > there might be somebody in the videoblogging community who 
can
> > toss me
> >  > > a lifeline here.
> >  > >
> >  > > Nick Friedman
> >  > > The Duckpond Pottery
> >  > > Brevard, North Carolina
> >  > > www.myspace.com/duckpondatdusk
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > > 
> >  > >
> >  > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  > >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > --
> >  > Jan McLaughlin
> >  > Production Sound Mixer
> >  > air = 862-571-5334
> >  > aim = janofsound
> >  > skype = janmclaughlin
> >  >
> > 
> >
>

[videoblogging] Re: Sanyo Xacti HD1010 4MP MPEG4 High Definition 1080i/1080p Camcorder with 10x Opti

[Heath]

I could be mistaken but I think that Sony Vegas would be able to 
handle this without pre rendering the video

I would love to be able to test that out...

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Garfield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> Just saw this:
> 
> Sanyo Xacti HD1010 4MP MPEG4 High Definition 1080i/1080p Camcorder 
with 10x Optical 
> Zoom
> 
> http://sanyodigital.com/product.aspx?v=22
> 
> Might be the one to get...
> 
> I've been holding off on HD because I didn't want to have to render 
the video after copying 
> to hard drive...
> 
> This one saves video as MPEG-4 H.264.
> 
> What's your workflow for editing HD video off of the HD1000...
> 
> Is there a rendering process?
> 
> I'm not on the current FCP.  Let me know if that'll help...
> 
> Your thoughts?
> 
> Thanks!
> --Steve
> http://stevegarfield.com
>

[videoblogging] Re: Preventing embedded videos from playing automatically on Myspace message boards

[Heath]

My stuff on Myspace from blip auto plays as well.  It's the player 
that you can embed into your site.  It's started a while ago, I just 
never did anything about it.  But I know it's also happening to me.

Heath
http://batmangeek.com
http://heathparks.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Jan McLaughlin" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In a situation like that, I would say calling Mr. Hudack on his cell
> might be in order. That is, if it's really a Blip issue - but based
> upon what you've described, I don't think it is.
> 
> What you describe sounds very strange.
> 
> Know there's an autoplay option in Blip's show player configuration
> process but can't imagine that even changing that option could cause
> autoplay across extant Blip embed code and/or players everywhere.
> 
> When you upload to MySpace, those videos aren't hosted @ Blip, but 
at
> MySpace, so deleting the Blip files wouldn't affect how your MySpace
> vids autoplayed (or not).
> 
> MySpace deleted all the videos I'd embedded in it and I can't for 
the
> life of me figure out how to re-do it.
> 
> My best guess is that the problem is with MySpace, not Blip.
> 
> Blip's cross-post to MySpace has been broken for a while - since
> MySpace altered something-or-other.
> 
> MySpace deleted the half dozen or so videos that were on my profile.
> Ack. Not very video friendly.
> 
> Jan
> 
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 4:37 PM, duckpondpotter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> >
> > I recently had an incident where many of the videos I had 
embedded on
> > Myspace message boards from Blip Tv had started playing 
automatically.
> >  This had the extremely undesirable effect of fouling the audio 
on the
> > homepage. We are making a documentary of the music scene in and 
around
> > our pottery shop, and the video posts, which were mainly musical
> > performances, were placed on the sites of musicians who were 
friends
> > with the people in the videos.  When our videos started playing
> > automatically, we suddenly were flooded with angry complaints from
> > musicians that our videos were messing up their pages.  
AHH!!!  We
> > had inadvertently become Spamers!!!I immediately deleted my 
videos
> > from Blip and e-mailed their staff for a solution to this.  I 
also put
> > out a bulletin in Myspace explaining and apologizing for the 
problem.
> >  Embedding video can be a great way to build an audience, but this
> > problem is suddenly making us more enemies than fans.  I'm hoping
> > there might be somebody in the videoblogging community who can 
toss me
> > a lifeline here.
> >
> > Nick Friedman
> > The Duckpond Pottery
> > Brevard, North Carolina
> > www.myspace.com/duckpondatdusk
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Jan McLaughlin
> Production Sound Mixer
> air = 862-571-5334
> aim = janofsound
> skype = janmclaughlin
>