Re: [videoblogging] Videobloggers Twitter Meetup Video

[Rupert Howe]

All right, I know, I'm sorry.  My only excuse is that I'm British.   
I'm genetically programmed to whine.

Brilliant video!


On 29 Jul 2010, at 20:56, John Coffey wrote:

> Exactly Schlomo, I knew of Jonny Goldstein orinally from this Yahoo  
> Group and welcomed him to Philly 2 years ago. I met Chris and Scott  
> (from DC) through Jonny. I'm sure there's been micro hookups  
> everywhere, especially via Twitter.
> Videoblogging isn't dead, it's what ever you put into it.
> John
>
> --- On Thu, 7/29/10, schlomo rabinowitz  wrote:
>
> > From: schlomo rabinowitz 
> > Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Videobloggers Twitter Meetup Video
> > To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Thursday, July 29, 2010, 1:46 PM
> > This was awesome!
> >
> > When people on this group start whining about where
> > videoblogging has gone,
> > just watch this video. They meet online, they meet offline,
> > they make
> > something.
> >
> > Rinse and repeat!
> >
> > Schlomo Rabinowitz
> > http://flavors.me/schlomo
> > AIM:schlomochat
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:33 AM, John Coffey
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm sure many of you are familiar with the names of
> > Jonny Goldstein and
> > > Scott Stead on this Videoblooger list from years gone
> > by. We did a meetup
> > > with Chris Suspect last month on my boat and Chris
> > shot the most amazing
> > > video that deserves a view and maybe a Vimeo
> > nomination if you enjoyed it.
> > > Thanks! JC
> > > our twitter/sailing/murder film http://vimeo.com/13665676 the  
> award
> > > nomination page http://bit.ly/9R4Rse
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> > videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Zoom H1 Mic

[Rupert Howe]

Yes, I meant aggregated over time, cutting lots of sync clips daily,  
and also just in allowing you to be a bit freer from clap & timecode  
contstraints when shooting doc stuff on the fly.  So it frees you up  
and gives you a bit of time in the shoot, as well as obviously saving  
time and boredom in the edit.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



On 23 Jul 2010, at 13:22, Richard Amirault wrote:

> - Original Message -
> From: "Rupert Howe"
>
> (snip)
> > I've been meaning to mention Pluraleyes here - it's a bit of  
> software
> > that syncs your external audio files and your camera video/audio  
> files
> > automatically, without the need for clappers or timecode. Saves
> > HOURS.
>
> I've tried it and it is nice, but saving "HOURS"?? .. not for me. I  
> usually
> run a Edirol R-09 or a Zoom H2 for better sound, and it's not that  
> hard to
> sync it up with the video. Only takes a few minutes.
>
> Richard Amirault
> Boston, MA, USA
> http://n1jdu.org
> http://bostonfandom.org
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7hf9u2ZdlQ
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re [videoblogging] Zoom H1 Mic

[Rupert Howe]

Sorry it borked for you, but I do know a *lot* of people IRL & online  
using Pluraleyes, and it does work really well.  And once you get it  
working, it makes a massive difference.  You say it mangled your  
project - I sync right at the start of the project, before cutting  
anything - get all the clips synced up, link them & then start cutting.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 23 Jul 2010, at 10:34, Joly MacFie wrote:

> Let's be clear: the H1, although it might mount on a camera, has no  
> mic
> level out suitable to plug in to your cam's mic input. Audio will  
> have to be
> synced separately.
>
> The H2, with it's 4 mics, and it's directional/surround sound  
> capability,
> placed in close proximity ro the subject (I have on more than one  
> occasion
> just asked the subject to hold it while talking) is an excellent  
> option.
>
> I did try Pluraleyes and it just mangled my project - I've gone back  
> to hand
> :)
>
> j
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 4:33 AM, Rupert Howe   
> wrote:
>
> > I have a Zoom H4N, and so do a few people I know, and it's awesome.
> > As a mic in itself, it's great - I've used it handheld and mounted  
> it
> > to the top of my 5D. But I use it more often as a recorder with XLR
> > mics. Very easy to control and has lots of features.
> >
> > I've been meaning to mention Pluraleyes here - it's a bit of  
> software
> > that syncs your external audio files and your camera video/audio  
> files
> > automatically, without the need for clappers or timecode. Saves
> > HOURS. Works with Final Cut Pro, Premiere and Vegas. It analyses the
> > camera audio file and the external recorder file and matches the
> > waveforms. Magic.
> >
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> >
> >
> > On 23 Jul 2010, at 05:24, David Jones wrote:
> >
> > > Anyone use one of these Zoom mics on their camera?
> > >
> > > The new H1 looks like great value at $99 and very versatile:
> > > http://www.zoom.co.jp/english/products/h1/index.php
> > >
> > > I could see it being used a top camera shotgun mic, a remote  
> recorder
> > > to replace a wireless mic system, corded interview mic etc
> > >
> > > I saw a Zoom H4n in use in a doco I was involved with the other  
> day
> > > using a Canon 5D MkII. Some behind the scenes footage:
> > >
> > http://www.eevblog.com/2010/07/23/canon-5d-mark-ii-hd-video-documentary-behind-the-scenes/
> > >
> > > Dave.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> -- 
> --
> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> --
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Zoom H1 Mic

[Rupert Howe]

Sorry it borked for you, but I do know a *lot* of people IRL & online  
using Pluraleyes, and it does work really well.  And once you get it  
working, it makes a massive difference.  You say it mangled your  
project - I sync right at the start of the project, before cutting  
anything - get all the clips synced up, link them & then start cutting.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 23 Jul 2010, at 10:34, Joly MacFie wrote:

> Let's be clear: the H1, although it might mount on a camera, has no  
> mic
> level out suitable to plug in to your cam's mic input. Audio will  
> have to be
> synced separately.
>
> The H2, with it's 4 mics, and it's directional/surround sound  
> capability,
> placed in close proximity ro the subject (I have on more than one  
> occasion
> just asked the subject to hold it while talking) is an excellent  
> option.
>
> I did try Pluraleyes and it just mangled my project - I've gone back  
> to hand
> :)
>
> j
>
> On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 4:33 AM, Rupert Howe   
> wrote:
>
> > I have a Zoom H4N, and so do a few people I know, and it's awesome.
> > As a mic in itself, it's great - I've used it handheld and mounted  
> it
> > to the top of my 5D. But I use it more often as a recorder with XLR
> > mics. Very easy to control and has lots of features.
> >
> > I've been meaning to mention Pluraleyes here - it's a bit of  
> software
> > that syncs your external audio files and your camera video/audio  
> files
> > automatically, without the need for clappers or timecode. Saves
> > HOURS. Works with Final Cut Pro, Premiere and Vegas. It analyses the
> > camera audio file and the external recorder file and matches the
> > waveforms. Magic.
> >
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> >
> >
> > On 23 Jul 2010, at 05:24, David Jones wrote:
> >
> > > Anyone use one of these Zoom mics on their camera?
> > >
> > > The new H1 looks like great value at $99 and very versatile:
> > > http://www.zoom.co.jp/english/products/h1/index.php
> > >
> > > I could see it being used a top camera shotgun mic, a remote  
> recorder
> > > to replace a wireless mic system, corded interview mic etc
> > >
> > > I saw a Zoom H4n in use in a doco I was involved with the other  
> day
> > > using a Canon 5D MkII. Some behind the scenes footage:
> > >
> > http://www.eevblog.com/2010/07/23/canon-5d-mark-ii-hd-video-documentary-behind-the-scenes/
> > >
> > > Dave.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> -- 
> --
> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> --
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Xacti Workflow w/External HDs

[Rupert Howe]

Nice rig & monopod video - thanks!

I think I'm not understanding something, but I'm going to ask a stupid  
question anyway rather than just wait for other replies - because I'm  
interested.

Why don't you just copy all the files from the Xacti memory card to  
your 1TB HD via Finder on your Mac?

Why do you need to make the HD work with the Xacti?  Surely the  
computer is the interface between the memory card and the HD?

And I didn't understand the use of MPEG Streamclip to filter.  Or even  
to transcode.  Surely you can avoid all that and just import the Xacti  
clips straight into iMovie, which transcodes them into its own  
editable format anyway?  Then you delete the clips you don't want in  
iMovie, while keeping all the original footage on your HD?

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 23 Jul 2010, at 01:17, Ron Watson wrote:

> Hey everybody!
>
> Alright,
> So got me my xacti and liking it so far. Using my Home Made Fig Rig  
> - http://blip.tv/file/653663/ - a new design, using an aluminium  
> bicycle wheel for the frame... anyway, not the point - I'm getting  
> some good footage:
> http://k9disc.blip.tv/file/3853003/ - Dog Class in a Park
> http://k9disc.blip.tv/file/3906053/ - Jam Session in good light -  
> big zoom... Fig rig is doing it's job.
>
> I'm in the process of reformatting my 1TB RAID HD. I had it  
> formatted to fat32 but iMovie can't write to it. SO I went  
> MacOSExtended (journaled) and now the Xacti can't write it.
>
> I have a 150 GB Maxtor HD that is functioning well.
> I was thinking about using that for my Xacti Library function - for  
> bringing all of it in - back up style. And then moving it to the 1TB  
> drive for permanent storage and editing.
>
> I also thought of just bringing everything into the PC and moving it  
> over manually/automagically via iMovie.
>
> I also am thinking of using mpeg streamclip as a filter for saving  
> decent footage and/or pre-editing file management.
>
> I'd like to hear what other xacti folk have to say about this.  
> Anybody have any info to share?
>
> Peace,
> Ron Watson
>
> Pawsitive Vybe
>
> On the Web:
> Pawsitive Vybe
> PVybe Blog
> Art of K9Disc
> K9Athlete.com
> Seminars
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Zoom H1 Mic

[Rupert Howe]

I have a Zoom H4N, and so do a few people I know, and it's awesome.
As a mic in itself, it's great - I've used it handheld and mounted it  
to the top of my 5D.  But I use it more often as a recorder with XLR  
mics.  Very easy to control and has lots of features.

I've been meaning to mention Pluraleyes here - it's a bit of software  
that syncs your external audio files and your camera video/audio files  
automatically, without the need for clappers or timecode.  Saves  
HOURS.  Works with Final Cut Pro, Premiere and Vegas.  It analyses the  
camera audio file and the external recorder file and matches the  
waveforms.  Magic.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



On 23 Jul 2010, at 05:24, David Jones wrote:

> Anyone use one of these Zoom mics on their camera?
>
> The new H1 looks like great value at $99 and very versatile:
> http://www.zoom.co.jp/english/products/h1/index.php
>
> I could see it being used a top camera shotgun mic, a remote recorder
> to replace a wireless mic system, corded interview mic etc
>
> I saw a Zoom H4n in use in a doco I was involved with the other day
> using a Canon 5D MkII. Some behind the scenes footage:
> http://www.eevblog.com/2010/07/23/canon-5d-mark-ii-hd-video-documentary-behind-the-scenes/
>
> Dave.
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] HTML5 Webinar tomorrow

[Rupert Howe]

Link and Blurb:

http://www.reelseo.com/free-webinar-html5-video/
Tomorrow, Wednesday July 21st at 11am Pacific time, we will be holding  
a FREE webinar titled, “Dive into HTML5 Video.”  This webinar will  
offer you the unique opportunity to learn about HTML5 video from true  
experts on the subject, Jeroen “JW” Wijering, creator of the JW Player  
and the Opera’s HTML5 video core developer, Philip Jagenstedt.  Sit in  
with us and you’ll truly, Learn from the Masters.

Here you will have a chance to learn about the various HTML5 video  
codecs (webM, Ogg, H.264), browsers that support HTML5, advantages,  
disadvantages, the future of HTML5 video, and how you can use it today.



Webinar Topics Include:

Overview of HTML5 
Why is HTML5 video relevant
Technical advantages / disadvantages vs. Flash etc…
Tips / best practices for HTML5
Browser support
How to code HTML5 with Flash fallback
and more….
Featured Presenters
Philip Jagenstedt - Phillip is a software developer at Opera  
Software.  His main work revolves around implementing HTML5   
and participating in various W3C working groups such as the HTML WG  
and the Media Fragments WG.  The HTML5  tag was invented at  
Opera. They weren’t the first browser the finally ship with it, but  
they were the first browser to ship with WebM support in Opera 10.60.

Jeroen “JW” Wijering - Jeroen is a pioneer when it comes to online  
video, Period. He is the Chief Digital Architect at LongTailVideo and  
is the creator of the incredibly successful JW Player, which has  
generated several million downloads since their launch in 2005. In  
addition, Jeroen has developed several other projects including  
Sync.nl, an online magazine for entrepreneurs and professionals as  
well as an online video hosting platform/service called Bits on the  
Run. Jeroen graduated from the Design Academy Eindhoven, with honors. 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The Video Blogger Is Dead

[Rupert Howe]

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Dave.

I won't ask you to wade back through my overlong posts - I was  
obviously unclear, since you're arguing with points I wasn't making.

I was talking about a specific *type* of videoblog which seems to have  
largely died out, following on from Clintus's video.

I wasn't attacking YouTube - I was just saying that it hasn't been a  
very welcoming environment for the type of videos that I was talking  
about.   I did try to spearhead a transition to YouTube a couple of  
years ago, but it didn't take.

I'm not attacking you or chastising you for using YouTube.  I think  
it's very inspiring that you've built such a successful videoblog  
using YouTube.  Other people have their preferences and they voice  
them vigorously, so I'm sorry if they've attacked you for using  
YouTube - although I hadn't, and you argued with me that I had, so  
maybe you see more attacks than there actually are.

Personally. I'm not that fussed - whatever works for the specific  
project and type of content.   I'm working on two YouTube based  
projects right now using YouTube annotations.

It's just that YouTube didn't work for the small community of people  
making this specific type of content a couple of years ago.  So - no  
argument.

Turns out from what Brook said that there is some of that type of  
content on YouTube, it's just that I haven't found it.   So that's  
exciting.  Still sad that the other stuff has gone, though.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 20 Jul 2010, at 04:42, David Jones wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Brook Hinton   
> wrote:
> > There is excellent work on You Tube. There are excellent people  
> calling
> > themselves videobloggers on You Tube doing work that can stand  
> with that of
> > the people Rupert cites and who have carved out niches where there  
> is
> > dynamic conversation going in relatively flame-free environment.
>
> I agree.
>
> "Youtubers" have not displaced anything or anyone, they are simply yet
> more content. If you don't like their content, don't watch, I can't
> see how they impact other video bloggers.
>
> Also, there is more than one side to every story, the world isn't
> black and white. Everyone has their own content and their own views,
> there is no one right way to "video blog" and produce content.
> And there is no one right way to use Youtube.
>
> >Rupert:
> >So YouTube videos get millions of views, while videobloggers only got
> >a few dozen or hundred on their own blog. Only the most exhibitionist
> >of people want to open themselves up in a place which is full of the
> >ugliest anonymous internet hate. It's fine if you're doing a 'show'
> >or a piece of entertainment or something informative - and not at all
> >fine if it's more personal or artistic. I'm not exactly introverted,
> >and I'm not prepared to do it.
>
> Sorry, but that's simply your choice, not a destined reality for most
> people I suspect.
>
> What's the hosting medium got to do with an individual's channel?,
> very little from my experience. Sure you might get a few idiot
> comments (if they bother to find you and watch), but it's hardly
> anything worth worth worrying about and I don't understand why anyone
> would care about it at all.
> If someone puts their video out into the public eye and then can't
> handle someone saying it's crap or whatever, then I'd suggest they
> find another interest! Life is too short to worry about idiot
> comments.
> Don't like the comments?, disable them and only allow comments on your
> own blog site with tighter control. You can still use Youtube for
> hosting and still benefit from the exposure.
>
> You usually can't have a large audience AND only positive comments,
> the world doesn't work like that. The bigger and more diverse your
> audience, the greater your chance of getting that one nutter that
> leaves abusive comments etc. Doesn't matter if you use Youtube, Vimeo,
> your own blog site, or whatever
>
> >So the only place for non-geeks to feel comfortable sharing personal
> >media is the horrific Facebook, where only a handful of people can  
> see
> >it.
>
> Rubbish.
> If you think you've been forced into a corner like that then I think
> that's very sad indeed.
> (yes, Facebook is rubbish!)
> Non-geeks are quite capable of using and having great success with
> Youtube with little of the vitriol you mention.
> The online world is full of people and comments you won't like,
> Youtube is not unique in this aspect, not by any stretch of the
> imagination, it happens almost everywhere.
> Ever tried posting to a Usenet newsgroup or some other open online BBS
> style forum?
> Ever seen the comments posted to online news stories?
> It's everywhere, you have to learn to deal with it or ignore it.
>
> > And videoblogging has never been about making stuff for your
> >family and close friends. It's been about reaching out into the
> >world, and making personal documentary videoblogs that have a bit  
> more
> 

Re: [videoblogging] Re: The Video Blogger Is Dead

[Rupert Howe]

I agree that the technology has evolved and is more widely used, and  
people are moving on to more advanced and commercial ways of making  
videos, and that some of our technological 'goals' have been achieved.

But it's more the *type* of videos that I'm thinking about.

 From 2004-7, I got excited about a new type of video - not a talking  
head webcam monologue or a clone of a commercial TV format, but the  
capturing and sharing of moments, editing them together and creating  
what were in effect personal documentaries.  An individual observing  
and interpreting the world around them with a pocket video camera and  
iMovie.  Transforming Life to Art, intentionally or not.

- Cutting personal video diaries into nicely cut fllms
- or just stitching together moving snapshots like a photo album
- or passionate handheld to-camera opinions, observations and  
conversations.
- and beyond that, a wider range of more experimental personal video  
art.

All in the context of comments & community.

I'm thinking of the range from Mike Moon to Ryanne Hodson to David  
Kessler to Robert Croma to Daniel Liss.

Quite a range, but you could curate an exhibition with videos from all  
of them and see a clear coherent link.

Maybe all this stuff is still going on, I just don't see so much of it  
any more.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv





On 19 Jul 2010, at 13:41, compumavengal wrote:

> No, I don't think it is dead but it has been evolving for quite some  
> time. Many of the goals of the early pioneers and adopters have been  
> achieved.
>
> We wanted to be able to upload and distribute our content. We wanted  
> engagement by a diverse group of people. We got it.
>
> There are people who are not videobloggers that are using the tools  
> and skills to promote goods and services. There are even more that  
> are documenting the good, better and best parts of human nature. Or  
> the worst cuz that is necessary too.
>
> Those folks don't get the recognition that they should but it is  
> happening.
>
> The YT community is evolving as well. The pressure of monitization  
> is pushing Google into rentals, more agreements with mainstream  
> providers and special projects where they control the direction of  
> the user content.
>
> Yet the individual YT'ers continue to hold their communities together.
> For how long I don't know. They are facing changes as well.
>
> Rupert, you were one of the first to actively push the line of cell/ 
> mobile video and look at what has happened and continues to happen  
> in that realm. iPad/Android is changing yet again what and how  
> people are consuming content.
>
> Will user generated content be locked out or do we have a say in it?  
> There are still areas to explore. There are still people to  
> encourage and engage.
>
> Whoa, gotta go.
>
> Gena
> http://createvideonotebook.blogspot.com
> http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe  wrote:
> >
> > Thoughtful post from Clintus McGintus today on idoitdigital.com
> >
> > http://idoitdigital.com/2010/07/15/the-video-blogger-is-dead/
> >
> > He mourns the passing of the videoblogging community where people
> > documented & shared their lives - now replaced by YouTubers.
> >
> > He has a more positive note about his continued commitment to it  
> from
> > 2:15 onwards, but the first part of it is really a sad statement  
> about
> > how creative personal videoblogging differs from YouTube  
> entertainment
> > and how it died.
> >
> > I think he's more or less right in this assessment. I largely blame
> > the toxic culture on YouTube, which meant good videobloggers were
> > reluctant to transition to YouTube, which was where all the  
> audiences
> > were.
> >
> > So YouTube videos get millions of views, while videobloggers only  
> got
> > a few dozen or hundred on their own blog. Only the most  
> exhibitionist
> > of people want to open themselves up in a place which is full of the
> > ugliest anonymous internet hate. It's fine if you're doing a 'show'
> > or a piece of entertainment or something informative - and not at  
> all
> > fine if it's more personal or artistic. I'm not exactly introverted,
> > and I'm not prepared to do it.
> >
> > So the only place for non-geeks to feel comfortable sharing personal
> > media is the horrific Facebook, where only a handful of people can  
> see
> > it. And videoblogging has never been about making stuff for your
> > family and close friends. It's been about reaching out into the
> > world, and making personal docume

[videoblogging] The Video Blogger Is Dead

[Rupert Howe]

Thoughtful post from Clintus McGintus today on idoitdigital.com

http://idoitdigital.com/2010/07/15/the-video-blogger-is-dead/

He mourns the passing of the videoblogging community where people  
documented & shared their lives - now replaced by YouTubers.

He has a more positive note about his continued commitment to it from  
2:15 onwards, but the first part of it is really a sad statement about  
how creative personal videoblogging differs from YouTube entertainment  
and how it died.

I think he's more or less right in this assessment.  I largely blame  
the toxic culture on YouTube, which meant good videobloggers were  
reluctant to transition to YouTube, which was where all the audiences  
were.

So YouTube videos get millions of views, while videobloggers only got  
a few dozen or hundred on their own blog.  Only the most exhibitionist  
of people want to open themselves up in a place which is full of the  
ugliest anonymous internet hate.  It's fine if you're doing a 'show'  
or a piece of entertainment or something informative - and not at all  
fine if it's more personal or artistic.  I'm not exactly introverted,  
and I'm not prepared to do it.

So the only place for non-geeks to feel comfortable sharing personal  
media is the horrific Facebook, where only a handful of people can see  
it.  And videoblogging has never been about making stuff for your  
family and close friends.  It's been about reaching out into the  
world, and making personal documentary videoblogs that have a bit more  
creative element to them.

More than anything, though, it's about the human connections and  
responses and conversation that arise from doing it.  It's a vicious  
cycle of lots of people having given up, so there's less conversation  
and encouragement, so even more people give up.  Now there's hardly  
anybody.

This group started as an amazing collection of artists, filmmakers,  
commercial show producers, people filming their families, early  
adopters, sharks and madmen - the whole range of people interested in  
using video online by hacking it into blogs - meaning that more people  
experimented with personal video.  Now most of those people have found  
other places to use and talk about video online, more suited to their  
interests & focus.  I wonder if there's any future for personal  
videoblogging, or whether it was just a strange passing anomaly that  
only resulted from that brief moment in time.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

Re: [videoblogging] Re: My Videoblogging Website

[Rupert Howe]

Posterous and Tumblr are really good options for non-geek  
videobloggers.  I think they beat Wordpress.com, Wordpress.org and  
Blogger blogs for ease of use & features.

Wordpress.com hosted blogs have a lot of media and code restrictions,  
that aren't great for videoblogging.

Wordpress.org self-hosted blogs are too much unnecessary work &  
complication for a non-geek videoblogger, in my opinion.   I've set up  
a lot of Wordpress self-hosted blogs for people, and they get confused  
when it comes to maintaining, updating, if things go wrong, etc.  And  
are particularly vulnerable to hacking.

Blogger is simple but ugly and not as feature-rich or useful as Tumblr  
or Posterous.

Posterous allows you to post blog posts and media really easily via  
email, mobile, or desktop.  And then will distribute your media out to  
dozens of social media sites & sharing sites.

Tumblr allows a bit more customization and code, and has a big  
community of users who read your updates easily via the Tumblr  
Dashboard.  Commenting is a bit less elegant IMO (more about Likes &  
Reblogs) and you don't have the easy distribution that Posterous gives  
you.

Personally, I use Tumblr for easy reblogging of things I find on the  
web, and Posterous when I need to set up a new videoblog for a  
specific project like a festival.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 17 Jul 2010, at 05:15, Pranab Chatterjee wrote:

>
> Thanks Dave! That was a great list!
>
> What about Posterous? With the introduction of static pages, free  
> custom domain (if you own it), ANY file type, no upload hassles,  
> etc. it does seem like a nice way out for newbies like ourselves!  
> The lack of different types of templates is also a bit of a problem  
> though!
>
> And isn't bloggertube ONLY compatible with the Youtube.com links?  
> Again, that's a rider I hate!
>
> Cheers,
> Pranab
>
> Pranab Chatterjee, MBBS
> Medical College, Kolkata, India
>
> http://blog.pranab.in
>
> pra...@pranab.in
>
> Mobile: 0091 98 361361 95
>
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> From: ratbagra...@gmail.com
> Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 03:31:44 +
> Subject: [videoblogging] Re: My Videoblogging Website
>
> Here's a few of Blogger template samples that should suit single  
> episode presentation:
>
> http://ipodtouch-btemplates.blogspot.com/
>
> http://randomness-notelog.blogspot.com/
>
> http://multimedia-blog-deluxetemplates.blogspot.com/
>
> I've also used
>
> http://hemingway-black.blogspot.com/2006/07/hemingway-template-for-blogger-black.html
>
> http://hemingway-white.blogspot.com/
>
> There's also the new Bloggertube
>
> http://btemplates.com/2009/blogger-template-bloggertube/demo/
>
> dave riley
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "philipmanktelow"  
>  wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Hello, I am a newbie to videoblogging. I have been going for just  
> over a month now on YouTube and Blip.tv
>
> > The thing is both YouTube and Blip.tv user pages aren't very  
> customizable so I made a Blogger.com blog but that too isn't very  
> customizable. Can anyone suggest a good customizable website i can  
> post videos too.
>
> >
>
> > That would be very helpful.
>
> >
>
> > Thank you,
>
> > Philip
>
> > http://www.youtube.com/philsthoughts
>
> > http://philipsthoughts.blip.tv
>
> >
>
>
> __
> Bollywood, beauties and the latest flicks on MSN entertainment
> http://entertainment.in.msn.com/
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: iphone4 video

[Rupert Howe]

I agree - exciting times.  Single device shooting, cutting and posting  
has excited me for years, and we're finally getting to do it with some  
stunning picture quality.

  I just wrote a blog post with sample HD video from the soon-to-be- 
released Nokia N8 and a video overview of its built in editing app:
http://chapterplay.tv/

Rupert

On 1 Jul 2010, at 18:03, calebjc wrote:

>
> I feel a sea change in some ways for video with the new smartphone/ 
> cameras, but at the same time, to look professional lot of the  
> skills and support equipment are very old school.
>
> Exciting times!
>
> Android or Apple, this is the question...I'm leaning toward Apple on  
> Verizon this summer, because of iMovie editing and Verizon is good  
> in VT for coverage and I have a family plan.
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] iphone4 video

[Rupert Howe]

This video was shot *and* cut on iPhone 4 - very nice:
http://vimeo.com/12819723
(though they took the audio off the phone & mixed it on a computer I  
think)

The new Nokia N8 (not yet released) is trying to match it, with HD  
video and an in-phone editor:
Nokia N8 HD video sample: http://is.gd/d8SJb
and article & video about the N8 in-phone editor: http://is.gd/d8Ssh

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 29 Jun 2010, at 22:30, Caleb Clark wrote:

> This video says it's all iPhone4, no color correction, but I saw  
> some helmet
> cam shots with what looked like a different cam...humm
> http://jalopnik.com/5575510/ducati-films-motorcycle-commercial-entirely-with-iphone-4
>
> -- 
> ~ Caleb Clark
> - Program Director, Marlboro College Graduate School:
> http://gradcenter.marlboro.edu/academics/mat/faculty
> - Portfolio: http://www.plocktau.com
> "The problem with communication is the assumption it has been  
> accomplished."
> - G. B. Shaw.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Underwater/Audio Issues

[Rupert Howe]

What a ridiculous design flaw.
Putting anything in there - putty, vaseline, etc, seems a dangerous  
way to go.
Suck the hole?

On 28 Jun 2010, at 13:38, mgmoon wrote:

> Hey folks. In the past I would just message Jan and she'd help me  
> figure out my audio issues. But I think this one may require an  
> expanded knowledge base or creative thinking.
>
> I have a Kodak PlaySport underwater camcorder.
> It's great for the pool, but it has one issue that I see as a design  
> flaw, that I'd like to overcome.
>
> When the camcorder goes underwater, the small microphone hole fills  
> with water. When the camera is not in the water, the hole remains  
> filled with water and the audio sounds muffled. Oh sure, I can shake  
> the camera or "blow the hole" (A phrase I never imagined writing in  
> the videoblogging group) and the water comes out. But the camera is  
> in the water, outta the water, in the water, etc.
>
> Initially I put some electrical tape over the hole, but due to the  
> design of the unit there is a trough that leads to the mic hole.
> Video explaining and showing details can be found here:
> http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2010/06/25/playsport-water-audio-issue/
>
> I tried a bigger piece of tape, but the results were the same, the  
> air in the hole, pressurizes out and fills with water. With the tape  
> over the hole, the audio is not noticeably degraded.
>
> So? I thought maybe some Vaseline in the trough, with tape over  
> might stop the filling --- but, before I go down that road, I'm  
> looking for other ideas. Perhaps sub Vaseline with maybe a little  
> putty in the trough and tape over top.
>
> Very happy with Kodak ZX3, except for this annoyance.
>
> What's you thoughts?
>
> Mike
> Http://MikeMoon.ca
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] VidMe - private video sharing

[Rupert Howe]

I've been looking for something that does this for a long time.   
Facebook and YouTube kind of do it, but their privacy settings are  
fiddly and I wouldn't trust them for anything really private.  I think  
interface is everything.  Not only do people need something to share  
their pics and vids easily with family and friends, but I think  
there's a corporate need too.

On 24 Jun 2010, at 02:43, deirdreharvey2002 wrote:

> Anyone else see this?
>
> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/23/a-site-for-the-videos-you-dont-want-everyone-to-see/
>
> Sorry, I mostly lurk here but I wondered if you guys had any  
> response to this. It's not earth-shattering, but it's an idea whose  
> time has come I think and that isn't necessarily a good thing.
>
> The user experience is pretty dreadful - you get sent an e-mail and  
> then the link you follow demands that you log in to see the video  
> you didn't ask for.
>
> I think it's interesting though that they're offering a way for  
> people to share video specifically for communicating with friends  
> with no possibility of finding a wider audience. My reaction is  
> "yay, personal video sharing" and also "boo, no serendipitous  
> happening upon personal videos by people you don't know".
>
> Anyone think they'd use something like this? (if it was better)
>
> OK I need to go to bed. I started replying to some of the comments  
> in the NYT article but it got too long, so did a blog post instead.
>
> http://www.deeharvey.com/blog/2010/06/23/sharing-videos-privately/
>
> dee
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] iTunes podcasting - what sucks, what blows?

[Rupert Howe]

Fantastic - thank you!  And thanks for sharing that subscriber data.   
People are usually shy of that here, but it's really interesting.

I agree that it's frustrating about the iTunes feed formatting,  
especially as they provide so little of the available metadata within  
the Podcast Directory.  Which makes it very hard to find stuff you  
might like, beyond the staff picks.  At the very least they should  
provide a feed burner in-house, so that you can put your own feed in  
as normal, and then customise your profile on iTunes, with all the  
other general show info that they want.

It's sad that social interaction and even commenting is still so  
hobbled.  IMO, the first, simplest and most important change they  
could make would be to add a permalink to the original blog post for  
each podcast episode. It's shocking that this still isn't there. While  
iTunes has changed a lot to adapt to the iPhone and now iPad, the  
podcast directory is still behaving like each audio/video file will be  
consumed dumbly on a non-internet-connected iPod.   Especially with  
new devices and TV set top boxes, people are going to want a way of  
consuming their entertainment that's more intelligent and less like a  
stripped-down version of the iTunes music library.

There's a mountain of other social and UI stuff too for both consumers  
and producers - and I'm interested in why they don't allow us to  
charge, particularly in lieu of lost ad revenue.  Too many sacrifices  
a producer has to make, for a free silent audience.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 21 Jun 2010, at 01:49, David Jones wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Rupert Howe   
> wrote:
> >
> > I've been asked to give some feedback on iTunes podcasting from a
> > producer/blogger perspective.
> >
> > What's your experience of it? What would you change, and what do you
> > like about it? As consumers & producers?
> >
> > I have a lot of my own experiences & opinions, to do with things  
> like
> > separation of content in the store from the web, discovery &
> > organising. And watching, especially compared with Miro.
> >
> > I know I have a lot of subscribers who watch via iTunes, but I  
> suspect
> > they hardly ever comment & rarely visit the site, which I find quite
> > frustrating. They don't seem to take advantage of the huge amount of
> > metadata in the feeds.
> >
> > I'm also interested in how it affects revenue - with decreased
> > tracking of ads in videos and views of ads on your sites, for  
> instance.
> >
> > Opinions gratefully received. It might make a difference!
> >
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
>
> I don't know all the technical details, as I don't use iTunes myself,
> and my Podpress plugin "just works".
> But over 1/3rd of my audience watch the podcast version of my show,
> and here is the breakdown on who uses what within that:
> http://www.eevblog.com/images/stats/Stats-Feedburner-June10.png
> So only about 5% of my total audience watch via an iTunes podcast.
> That's not very many, but they are quite vocal.
>
> And from a content producers perspective, I have to use the Podpress
> plug-in in Wordpress just to cater to those 5%, to generate the iTunes
> compatible feed file.
> iTunes apparently requires it's own specific data format for the
> information. Why it can't just use regular RSS/XML feed information
> like everyone else I don't know. So for me that's the biggest gripe,
> you have to generate "iTunes" specific information. But hey, that's
> Apple for you.
>
> I get very little or no revenue from people who watch via the Podcast.
> I have Adsense ads on the RSS feed, and I don't know exactly how or
> where they show up, the clicks are a very small percentage of my total
> ad revenue. So I just "write off" the Podcasters as lost ad revenue.
> If anyone has any better ideas in that area then I'm all ears. I do
> try to get them over to the forum and web site for comments, but like
> yourself I suspect they are just part of the "silent" audience.
>
> Dave.
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] iTunes podcasting - what sucks, what blows?

[Rupert Howe]

I've been asked to give some feedback on iTunes podcasting from a  
producer/blogger perspective.

What's your experience of it?  What would you change, and what do you  
like about it?  As consumers & producers?

I have a lot of my own experiences & opinions, to do with things like  
separation of content in the store from the web, discovery &  
organising.  And watching, especially compared with Miro.

I know I have a lot of subscribers who watch via iTunes, but I suspect  
they hardly ever comment & rarely visit the site, which I find quite  
frustrating.  They don't seem to take advantage of the huge amount of  
metadata in the feeds.

I'm also interested in how it affects revenue - with decreased  
tracking of ads in videos and views of ads on your sites, for instance.

Opinions gratefully received.  It might make a difference!

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercue 2010

[Rupert Howe]

Have fun.  Very sad not to be there.  When it was announced, I planned  
to save money and buy a ticket.  But it was my parent's 50th wedding  
anniversary party today anyway, so I couldn't make it regardless of  
parlous finances and carbon guilt.  Send my love to everyone.  Post  
vids like it's 2005.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 19 Jun 2010, at 16:02, Adam Quirk wrote:

> See you guys at 6pm tonight at the Bushwick Starr.
>
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Adam Quirk  
> wrote:
>
> > There's a Facebook page for Vloggercue if anyone is interested in  
> that sort
> > of thing:
> > http://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?eid=117946824885160
> >
> > Trying to get a rough estimate of how much booze and food we'll  
> need. We'll
> > send out an official invite thing next month.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Adam
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Markus Sandy  
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Apr 27, 2010, at 3:04 PM, schlomo rabinowitz wrote:
> >>
> >> > Clint Sharp and Clark ov Saturn!!!
> >> >
> >> > Miss them both.
> >>
> >>
> >> And I miss their videos very much.
> >>
> >> I will always cherish Melanie's "meanness". I can't walk though an
> >> airport without thinking about that moment.
> >>
> >> And Renegades' videos too. Some are online, but some of the best  
> are
> >> nowhere that I can find.
> >>
> >> Any hard disk I owned back then went kaput long ago. As they say:
> >> it's not a matter of 'if', but 'when' . Mean time to failure for  
> sure.
> >>
> >> Please post your videos on the Internet Archive with a CC license
> >> folks. blip users can just check a box to make it so :)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Drew put together a cool PSA about why:
> >>
> >> http://papyromancer.net/iacc-promo.html
> >>
> >> He's looking for folks who can translate the subtitles and has  
> put the
> >> raw video (mashed from other IA/CC video of course):
> >>
> >> http://www.archive.org/details/InternetArchiveCreativeCommonsPromo
> >>
> >> and has the subtitles over at
> >>
> >> http://github.com/papyromancer/iacc-promo-subtitles/
> >>
> >>
> >> Markus
> >> http://twitter.com/apperceptions
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> [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]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Fwd: [videoblogging] Send by email, share on Wordpress?

[Rupert Howe]

Meant to say, Pixelpipe will distribute your videos and pictures to  
pretty much wherever you want.

And try http://posterous.com too for awesome mobile blogging &  
vlogging by email. they will also distribute your videos & pics to all  
the sharing and social media sites.  Nice automatic slideshows when  
you email them multiple pictures, too.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Rupert Howe 
> Date: 13 June 2010 20:43:28 BST
> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Send by email, share on Wordpress?
> Reply-To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
>
> Pixelpipe.com - by email, on their site, and they have mobile apps for
> iPhone, Nokia Share, etc too.
>
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
>
> On 13 Jun 2010, at 20:31, gogen001 wrote:
>
>> Hi.
>> Sorry if this has already been answered and discussed, but since
>> blip.tv no longer accepts vids by email I'm trying to find another
>> site which can accept mp4 file by e-mail and distribute it to:
>> - youtube
>> - wordpress blog (my own domain)
>>
>> Using blip.tv's web uploading works fine but is a real pain when
>> used on mobile phone.
>>
>> Thank you very much for your help and suggestions!
>>
>> GoGen
>> N97 mini
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> 
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Send by email, share on Wordpress?

[Rupert Howe]

Pixelpipe.com - by email, on their site, and they have mobile apps for  
iPhone, Nokia Share, etc too.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 13 Jun 2010, at 20:31, gogen001 wrote:

> Hi.
> Sorry if this has already been answered and discussed, but since  
> blip.tv no longer accepts vids by email I'm trying to find another  
> site which can accept mp4 file by e-mail and distribute it to:
> - youtube
> - wordpress blog (my own domain)
>
> Using blip.tv's web uploading works fine but is a real pain when  
> used on mobile phone.
>
> Thank you very much for your help and suggestions!
>
> GoGen
> N97 mini
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] Best way to share clips/footage

[Rupert Howe]

I want to share all the clips that I shot yesterday so that people can  
reuse them in whatever way they want.

I'm interested to know what you would use to do this:  To organise  
them in a group in the cloud, and make them easily viewable and  
downloadable.

As I mentioned in the iPhone post, I spent yesterday videoing scenes  
from The Wicker Man with a whole load of people, shot on my phone in a  
London park.

My video's going to end up being very short.  I'll do a "making of"  
vlog post as well.  But as always, there are a lot of shots that won't  
get used.  Seems a shame to waste them if they can be recycled.  And  
obviously it'd be nice to see what other people could do with more  
time & talent.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

cc: Artists In The Cloud Google group

Re: [videoblogging] Online video editing sites

[Rupert Howe]

Thanks for these, JD.  I haven't used them - interested to check them  
out.

There's also Kaltura:

http://corp.kaltura.com/technology/editing_and_annotation

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 8 Jun 2010, at 07:24, JD Lasica wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> Haven't popped in here for a while. We're running a story on video
> editing for nonprofits. I wanted to make passing mention of some
> online alternatives, except most have bitten the dust in the past 3
> years:
>
> Eyespot folded.
>
> Yahoo purchased Jumpcut and then closed it.
>
> Cuts is gone.
>
> Videoegg went into the advertising game.
>
> Onetruemedia is more about dumbed-down video montages.
>
> So what's left?
>
> 1. Jaycut.com
>
> 2. Motionbox.com
>
> 3. Moviemasher.com
>
> That sound right? Anything else that's easy to use and smartly done
> (and isn't simply an entertaining mashup tool)?
>
> thanks!
>
> jd lasica
> founder, socialbrite.org
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 720p HD and video editing on the iPhone 4

[Rupert Howe]

Was just coming here to write the same post.

I love mobile video.  I've just spent the day shooting a remake of the  
ending of the Wicker Man on my Nokia N93 phone, with about 40  
people.   The lofi video quality will have its own charm, but I can't  
help feeling the irony of it being on the same day as this announcement.

I'm so frustrated that it's taken Apple so long to introduce something  
that I've wanted since the iPhone first launched.  Especially since  
Nokia have killed the editing in their N Series phones, and - as you  
say - the UI is so poor on Nokia.   But this has tipped the balance  
for me.  I'll be getting one as soon as I can afford it.

Can't wait to play with it.  Wish I had a bit more cash to splash on  
it right now.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 7 Jun 2010, at 21:16, elbowsofdeath wrote:

> OK so finally the iPhone reaches a stage where it can start to live  
> up to our expectations for what a powerful mobile device should be  
> able to offer for video.
>
> Obviously not the only device in the world that can do these things  
> but if Apple have designed the editing app very well and the camera  
> quality is good enough, it should be quite a lovely experience.
>
> I held off from getting a 3GS and stayed with my no-video 3G iphone,  
> so Im really looking forward to upgrading - Ive long missed the  
> video that the Nokia N95 offered me before I got the iphone, but not  
> the UI & workflow of Nokia etc phones, and now I should finally be  
> able to have a much better device on all fronts.
>
> I look forward to some clever video editing capabilities on the iPad  
> too at some point, but it may take some time for this to be done  
> really well.
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: WebM Project

[Rupert Howe]

If you can get past the presenter's weird boob jiggling, this demo  
video shows it off quite well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lp8aMhluDs

It's a closed, walled-garden Flash deal.  More like a set top box  
interface.  But pretty and full of features - more on the way.  Will  
be interesting to see how they rebuild it in HTML5.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 29 May 2010, at 15:20, Michael Sullivan wrote:

> Not familiar with navigaya.com.
> Dont see info on site and requires login to go deeper but no signup.
> Care to elaborate?
>
> On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 7:12 AM, Rupert Howe   
> wrote:
>
> > Just catching up after week away, reading the various breakdowns &
> > speculations.
> >
> > So WebM only matches h.264 baseline profile for quality, and is
> > bulkier and slower and uses more power? But surely the point is that
> > this is just the beginning of an open development process?
> >
> > And isn't the most important thing that we now have something open
> > that rivals h.264, which weakens MPEG-LA's position when they come  
> to
> > review the patent fees in 5 years. Even if it's not quite as good.
> > The market cares more about cost than quality (VHS vs Betamax, etc).
> >
> > I'm sure that Google must have seen that alone as worth the $120m  
> they
> > spent on ON2. And then smart of them to realise that the best hope
> > for VP8 to survive was to open source it. Who's going to choose
> > another proprietary codec instead of h.264, especially if it's not  
> as
> > good?
> >
> > Speculations about the patents seem pointless - a patent pool will  
> no
> > doubt emerge and the risks will have been reviewed ad nauseam by
> > Google. Similarities with h264 will have been obvious to them and  
> are
> > surely arguable by prior art, as noted by the x264 developer in his
> > breakdown & updates & the comments. Google will deal with challenges
> > the same way they've dealt with people like Viacom.
> >
> > Depressing to see Steve's notes about WebM CPU use though. Had hoped
> > video might be lighter & greener in all its post-Flash incarnations.
> >
> > Re full page video: Odd how few cool tools have been made with HTML5
> > video so far. It'll be interesting to see what the HTML5 version of
> > Navigaya.com looks like, which they say is coming soon. Recently
> > launched as Flash only - nice full page video/web TV, social media &
> > browsing interface - a bit like the interfaces Elbows has mused  
> about
> > a few times over the years here.
> >
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> >
> > On 22 May 2010, at 14:22, elbowsofdeath wrote:
> >
> > > At this stage by biggest problem is how much CPU it uses to
> > > playback, quality seems ok to me but CPU use is not.
> > >
> >
> > > As for the whole page as a canvas for videos, I guess there is  
> quite
> > > a lot of potential there, either through multiple videos or
> > > different parts of the page playing back different periods of time
> > > from a single video file.
> > >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman 
> > > wrote:
> > > > Interesting to read, but I would make note of the source. anyone
> > > > invested in H264 will obviously do what they can to lay down  
> fear.
> > > > Remember when Google bought Youtube and there was all the fear  
> of
> > > > copyright lawsuits? Google has the lawyers to figure it out.
> > > >
> > > > The more important issue to research is how well WebM works.  
> Hows it
> > > > look, how smooth is it, how well does it compress and  
> transcode? If
> > > > Google gives developers all the resources they need, let's give
> > > people
> > > > 3 months before we see some cool expeirments.
> > > >
> > > > In my mind, the whole idea is to break out of the idea of "the  
> video
> > > > in the player". What if you could use the whole page as a  
> canvas for
> > > > your videos? Stan is right that creators need the tools to do  
> this.
> > > >
> > > > As Verdi said, http://www.mirovideoconverter.com/, is a nice  
> free
> > > tool
> > > > to transcode to WebM for tests.
> > > >
> > > > Jay
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > http://ryanishungry.com
> > > > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> > > >

Re: [videoblogging] Re: WebM Project

[Rupert Howe]

Just catching up after week away, reading the various breakdowns &  
speculations.

So WebM only matches h.264 baseline profile for quality, and is  
bulkier and slower and uses more power?  But surely the point is that  
this is just the beginning of an open development process?

And isn't the most important thing that we now have something open  
that rivals h.264, which weakens MPEG-LA's position when they come to  
review the patent fees in 5 years.  Even if it's not quite as good.   
The market cares more about cost than quality (VHS vs Betamax, etc).

I'm sure that Google must have seen that alone as worth the $120m they  
spent on ON2.  And then smart of them to realise that the best hope  
for VP8 to survive was to open source it.  Who's going to choose  
another proprietary codec instead of h.264, especially if it's not as  
good?

Speculations about the patents seem pointless - a patent pool will no  
doubt emerge and the risks will have been reviewed ad nauseam by  
Google.  Similarities with h264 will have been obvious to them and are  
surely arguable by prior art, as noted by the x264 developer in his  
breakdown & updates & the comments.  Google will deal with challenges  
the same way they've dealt with people like Viacom.

Depressing to see Steve's notes about WebM CPU use though.  Had hoped  
video might be lighter & greener in all its post-Flash incarnations.

Re full page video: Odd how few cool tools have been made with HTML5  
video so far.  It'll be interesting to see what the HTML5 version of  
Navigaya.com looks like, which they say is coming soon.  Recently  
launched as Flash only - nice full page video/web TV, social media &  
browsing interface - a bit like the interfaces Elbows has mused about  
a few times over the years here.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 22 May 2010, at 14:22, elbowsofdeath wrote:

> At this stage by biggest problem is how much CPU it uses to  
> playback, quality seems ok to me but CPU use is not.
>

> As for the whole page as a canvas for videos, I guess there is quite  
> a lot of potential there, either through multiple videos or  
> different parts of the page playing back different periods of time  
> from a single video file.
>


>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman   
> wrote:
> > Interesting to read, but I would make note of the source. anyone
> > invested in H264 will obviously do what they can to lay down fear.
> > Remember when Google bought Youtube and there was all the fear of
> > copyright lawsuits? Google has the lawyers to figure it out.
> >
> > The more important issue to research is how well WebM works. Hows it
> > look, how smooth is it, how well does it compress and transcode? If
> > Google gives developers all the resources they need, let's give  
> people
> > 3 months before we see some cool expeirments.
> >
> > In my mind, the whole idea is to break out of the idea of "the video
> > in the player". What if you could use the whole page as a canvas for
> > your videos? Stan is right that creators need the tools to do this.
> >
> > As Verdi said, http://www.mirovideoconverter.com/, is a nice free  
> tool
> > to transcode to WebM for tests.
> >
> > Jay
> >
> > --
> > http://ryanishungry.com
> > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> > 917 371 6790
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] ReelDirector?

[Rupert Howe]

It's not low end for anyone here!  (Despite all our bluster about  
codecs and prosumer editing tools!)  ReelDirector is one of the main  
reasons I'd consider getting an iPhone, especially since Nokia hobbled  
their in-phone editor.  I used to shoot & cut everything in my phone.   
I miss being able to do it easily.

Verdi has used ReelDirector - and some others here, I think.

On 5 May 2010, at 16:32, neophoto3000 wrote:

> I know this is low-end for you lot, but has anybody here played  
> around with ReelDirector, the iPhone video editing app?
>
> The cons are obvious, but I'm wondering if there are any pros  
> anybody can report.
>
> I'm especially interested in hearing if anybody's tooled around with  
> it on the iPad...
>
> Thanks,
> Chris
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Google to open source VP8

[Rupert Howe]

On 2 May 2010, at 14:28, elbowsofdeath wrote:

> Jobs cant really say much about VP8 until oogle make an official  
> announcement about it can he?
>
Fair enough, I guess, though it seems a pretty open secret.  And  
they've bought it, right?  So it's not irrelevant, and the possibility  
should deserve some recognition in a full honest discussion?

> As for Quicktime,if we care about open standards then thank god  
> Quicktime multimedia development hasnt gone anywhere,
>
Really? Ignore the possibilities it presented?  Just for the sake of  
open standards?

> or we'd still be trapped in the 2004 battle between Apple &  
> Microsoft for codec/plugin dominance.
>
Are we not still trapped in a newer version of the old battles?  Only  
with Apple and MS aligned for h.264 use only and Mozilla for theora  
only - with Google, Chrome & YT somewhere in between?

> HTML5 is the best hope on that front, regardless of which codec is  
> used for the video & audio. There are already some basic tools in  
> Adobe CS5 to enable some limited sorts of flash stuff to be turned  
> into HTML5, and within a few years this stuff should explode in a  
> vendor-neutral way, leaving the video codec as the only issue.
>
I really look forward to HTML5 being widely usable, when browser  
compatibility and codec tolerance allows us to make video pages that  
more than 50% of web users can see, but it would still be nice to be  
able to easily make portable interactive networked video files that  
aren't dependent on the HTML page they're sitting in.

> So clearly I disagree that Apple are the biggest offender when it  
> comes to 'dumb video blackbox' stuff.
>
Why "so"?  Glad Adobe are building tools for the inevitable HTML5  
transition, but surely Apple are the ones who had QT technology which  
made video not dumb, and then ignored, starved & killed it?  I wonder  
whether that makes them worse than people who never had that view of  
video in the first place?

> As for FUD, lets be honest, there is plenty of FUD about H.264 too.  
> There are legit issues for the future but its pretty telling that  
> people who are against H.264 took little comfort when the H.264  
> patent-pool managers pushed back any woe for years.
>
I agree - I think the discussion has revolved a lot around Jobs's  
fudging of h.264 as 'open', and the difference he makes between that  
and Theora in his short response to Hugo?

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe  wrote:
> >
> > In all Job's attacks on Flash, he didn't really talk about the
> > technical limitations of Flash video for animation/interactivity/ 
> media
> > synchronization - which is telling, since Apple systematically  
> ignored
> > Quicktime development & interactive Quicktime for years - and have
> > basically just chopped Quicktime off at the knees. For 10 years
> > Quicktime has been able to handle things that Flash still can't do.
> >
> > If Jobs had made interactive Quicktime & Interactive Quicktime
> > development a priority 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago when video
> > was obviously about to happen in a big way, he might have avoided  
> the
> > explosion in Flash video and the problems he's getting now, so he's
> > made his own bed AFAIC.
> >
> > And now come a bit late to the party to push a 3rd party patented
> > codec that's not a great deal more useful than Flash, and  
> dependent on
> > HTML5 or Apps for interactivity.
> >
> > The ignoring and lack of development of Quicktime, one of their most
> > powerful technologies, is the biggest of the growing number of  
> things
> > that (as a longtime Mac user) are making me dislike Apple more &  
> more.
> >
> > On another list, Adrian Miles talked about his "frustration at
> > industry 'innovators' wanting to treat video as a dumb object and
> > devices for playback as blackboxes". Apple is the biggest culprit in
> > this.
> >
> > Re the theora patent pool thing - as Verdi noted, it's the usual
> > patent Fear Uncertainty & Doubt, with absolutely no idea of whether
> > there's any substance that would allow an action to be brought, let
> > alone won. It's the passive voice that I noticed - it's the present
> > continuous tense - *is being* rather than *has been* or *was  
> being* -
> > - so it's something that's still underway, and presumably - since
> > theora is not new - has been going on for a while.
> >
> > And I find it quite telling that VP8 hasn't featured in Job's letter
> &g

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Google to open source VP8

[Rupert Howe]

In all Job's attacks on Flash, he didn't really talk about the  
technical limitations of Flash video for animation/interactivity/media  
synchronization - which is telling, since Apple systematically ignored  
Quicktime development & interactive Quicktime for years - and have  
basically just chopped Quicktime off at the knees.  For 10 years  
Quicktime has been able to handle things that Flash still can't do.

If Jobs had made interactive Quicktime & Interactive Quicktime  
development a priority 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago when video  
was obviously about to happen in a big way, he might have avoided the  
explosion in Flash video and the problems he's getting now, so he's  
made his own bed AFAIC.

And now come a bit late to the party to push a 3rd party patented  
codec that's not a great deal more useful than Flash, and dependent on  
HTML5 or Apps for interactivity.

The ignoring and lack of development of Quicktime, one of their most  
powerful technologies, is the biggest of the growing number of things  
that (as a longtime Mac user) are making me dislike Apple more & more.

On another list, Adrian Miles talked about his "frustration at  
industry 'innovators' wanting to treat video as a dumb object and  
devices for playback as blackboxes".  Apple is the biggest culprit in  
this.

Re the theora patent pool thing - as Verdi noted, it's the usual  
patent Fear Uncertainty & Doubt, with absolutely no idea of whether  
there's any substance that would allow an action to be brought, let  
alone won.  It's the passive voice that I noticed - it's the present  
continuous tense - *is being* rather than *has been* or *was being* -  
- so it's something that's still underway, and presumably - since  
theora is not new - has been going on for a while.

And I find it quite telling that VP8 hasn't featured in Job's letter  
or response.  I hate the expression "elephant in the room" but really,  
the fact that he can't even bring himself to mention it says to me  
that  it undermines his argument about H.264 v Flash, even though I  
agree with most of his points about Flash.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



On 2 May 2010, at 08:15, Joly MacFie wrote:

> A fair point is made in the comments in that article, that it isn't
> worth the patent trolls time and money unless someone deep-pocketed
> like Apple gets involved, but then they coud well come out of the
> woodwork.
>
> Another comment does, however, note his use of the passive tense to
> describe this process.
>
> http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=789
>
> On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 12:56 AM, tom_a_sparks  > wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi   
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie  wrote:
> >> >
> >>
> >> > I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
> >> > potential encumbrance.
> >> >
> >
> > the same comments were give about vorbis, where are the court cases?
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> -- 
> --
> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> --
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Fwd: Online Video Monetization Summit, May 5th in NYC

[Rupert Howe]

That's one way of making money as a producer, sure.  Particularly for  
videobloggers, it's the easiest way.  But videobloggers are not really  
the point here in this Brightcove thing.

People are finding and experimenting with other ways of making money  
through online video apart from advertising, and apart from Google/YT  
ads.  People interested in making money from independent production  
don't want to just be dependent on the crumbs that Google throw their  
way after they've plastered their content in keyword-targeted overlay  
ads.

There are a lot of other things that producers, agencies, brands, etc  
are interested in - and from what I saw of the breakdown of the day  
it's not just a flog from Brightcove  - though sure, there'll be  
plenty of that - and *of course* you wouldn't expect them to be  
pimping Google in their description.

For an unusually free day, though, the main benefits would seem to me  
to be the other people attending, who are usually the most interesting  
part of events like this, and Brightcove's own data about people's  
viewing habits & perspective on the future, and also the speakers from  
Ogilvy, Tubemogul, Freewheel & Quantcast - and the discussions cover  
things like:
Mobile Advertising, Over-the-Top Distribution, Advertising in Live  
Events, Bringing TV Advertisers Online, Digital Ad serving Standards &  
Audience Measurement & Profiling.
Especially given the profusion of IPTV Set Top Box, internet ready TV  
sets and portable devices like the iPad this year.

Anyway, not perhaps a videoblogger thing, but I wouldn't say just a  
crock

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 2 May 2010, at 00:56, David Jones wrote:

> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Rupert Howe   
> wrote:
> >
> > It's free?!
> > If anybody here is going to this, would love to have a peek at their
> > notes :)
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
>
> It's a crock, they are just flogging their own stuff.
> Notice no mention of the words Youtube or Adsense.
> Making money from video blogs and other online content is easy, it's a
> two step process:
> 1) Google Adsense ads
> 2) Youtube channel linked to Google Adsense.
>
> Anything else is almost guaranteed to be a waste of time and effort.
>
> Dave.
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Fwd: Online Video Monetization Summit, May 5th in NYC

[Rupert Howe]

:) I know, it's always a case of listening to a series of people  
giving you a sales pitch at these things, however well disguised it is  
- but they still usually try to charge you for the pleasure, roping in  
an array of clueless suckers who are desperate not to be left behind.   
But it's still interesting to hear how businesses are selling online  
video at the moment.
Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv/

On 1 May 2010, at 10:44, Joly MacFie wrote:

> Essentially it looks like a sales pitch for Brightcove.. perhaps they
> should be paying you to attend.. :)
>
> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Rupert Howe   
> wrote:
> > It's free?!
> > If anybody here is going to this, would love to have a peek at their
> > notes :)
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> > On 30 Apr 2010, at 18:56, Joly MacFie wrote:
> >
> >> Free - 28 tix left - http://
> >> brightcovevideomonetization.eventbrite.com/
> >>
> >> -- Forwarded message --
> >> From: Streaming Media Xtra 
> >> Date: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 8:20 AM
> >> Subject: Online Video Monetization Summit, May 5th in NYC
> >>
> >> <http://www.brightcove.com/> Cannot see this email? *View it as a  
> Web
> >> page*<#1284ea994584db69_>
> >> . <http://tracking.onlineinc.com/sponsorhit.aspx?sponsorship_id=14466 
> >
> >>
> >> On May 5th, 2010 in New York, Brightcove will bring together key
> >> industry
> >> leaders for a compelling look at the future of video monetization.
> >>
> >> This 1-day event will give digital media and marketing  
> professionals
> >> the
> >> opportunity to hear directly from the leaders shaping the industry
> >> and learn
> >> about winning strategies and best practices from the organizations
> >> already
> >> succeeding today.
> >>
> >> *See the full agenda and register for the
> >> event<http://tracking.onlineinc.com/sponsorhit.aspx?sponsorship_id=14466
> >> >
> >> * →
> >>
> >> *Speakers include:*
> >>
> >> - Jeremy Allaire, CEO, Brightcove
> >> - Rob Davis, Interactive Marketing Director, Ogilvy Interactive
> >> - Adam Gerber, CMO, Quantcast
> >> - Frans Vermeulen, VP of Client & Business Services, FreeWheel
> >> - Erica Crossen, Director of Best Practices & Advertising  
> Operations,
> >> Brightcove
> >> - Chris Johnston, Director of Technology Partners, Brightcove
> >>
> >> This event is complimentary and space is limited. Don't wait to  
> sign
> >> up!
> >>
> >> <http://tracking.onlineinc.com/sponsorhit.aspx? 
> sponsorship_id=14466>
> >>
> >> We look forward to seeing you there.
> >>
> >> The Brightcove Video Monetization Team
> >>
> >> Brightcove is a Web-based platform that makes it easy to deliver
> >> professional-quality video experiences through your website. Unlike
> >> free
> >> video sharing sites, Brightcove gives you complete control over the
> >> video
> >> experience you put on your site. Organizations of all sizes choose
> >> Brightcove for its ease of use and its power to scale from the
> >> simplest
> >> project to the most complex.
> >>
> >> © 2010 Brightcove, Inc. One Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142,
> >> USA
> >> *Terms & Conditions* <http://www.brightcove.com/terms-and-conditions/ 
> >
> >> *Privacy
> >> Policy* <http://www.brightcove.com/en/privacy>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> *NOTICE:* Recipients of the Streaming Media Xtra e-newsletter will
> >> occasionally receive information on certain products and services.
> >>
> >> To subscribe to Streaming Media magazine, go to:
> >> http://www.streamingmedia.com/magazine/
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe from the Streaming Media Bulletin please click  
> below:
> >> http://listserv.onlineinc.com/unsubscribe.aspx?bounce.13321.395...@bounce.infotoday.com
> >>
> >> Copyright 2010, Streaming Media, a Division of Information Today,
> >> 143 Old Marlton Pike, Medford, NJ 08055-8750, USA; (609) 654-6266,
> >> http://www.infotoday.com
> >>
> >> Problems with this message? Send an e-mail to h...@emediapro.com.
> >> Please do
> >> not reply to this message, as it was sent from an unattended  
> mailbox.
> >>
> >> --
> >> --
> >> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> >> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> >> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> >> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> >> --
> >>
> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> -- 
> --
> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> --
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Fwd: Online Video Monetization Summit, May 5th in NYC

[Rupert Howe]

It's free?!
If anybody here is going to this, would love to have a peek at their  
notes :)
Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 30 Apr 2010, at 18:56, Joly MacFie wrote:

> Free - 28 tix left - http:// 
> brightcovevideomonetization.eventbrite.com/
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Streaming Media Xtra 
> Date: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 8:20 AM
> Subject: Online Video Monetization Summit, May 5th in NYC
>
>  Cannot see this email? *View it as a Web
> page*<#1284ea994584db69_>
> . 
>
> On May 5th, 2010 in New York, Brightcove will bring together key  
> industry
> leaders for a compelling look at the future of video monetization.
>
> This 1-day event will give digital media and marketing professionals  
> the
> opportunity to hear directly from the leaders shaping the industry  
> and learn
> about winning strategies and best practices from the organizations  
> already
> succeeding today.
>
> *See the full agenda and register for the
> event >
> * →
>
> *Speakers include:*
>
> - Jeremy Allaire, CEO, Brightcove
> - Rob Davis, Interactive Marketing Director, Ogilvy Interactive
> - Adam Gerber, CMO, Quantcast
> - Frans Vermeulen, VP of Client & Business Services, FreeWheel
> - Erica Crossen, Director of Best Practices & Advertising Operations,
> Brightcove
> - Chris Johnston, Director of Technology Partners, Brightcove
>
> This event is complimentary and space is limited. Don't wait to sign  
> up!
>
> 
>
> We look forward to seeing you there.
>
> The Brightcove Video Monetization Team
>
> Brightcove is a Web-based platform that makes it easy to deliver
> professional-quality video experiences through your website. Unlike  
> free
> video sharing sites, Brightcove gives you complete control over the  
> video
> experience you put on your site. Organizations of all sizes choose
> Brightcove for its ease of use and its power to scale from the  
> simplest
> project to the most complex.
>
> © 2010 Brightcove, Inc. One Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142,  
> USA
> *Terms & Conditions* 
> *Privacy
> Policy* 
>
> --
>
> *NOTICE:* Recipients of the Streaming Media Xtra e-newsletter will
> occasionally receive information on certain products and services.
>
> To subscribe to Streaming Media magazine, go to:
> http://www.streamingmedia.com/magazine/
>
> To unsubscribe from the Streaming Media Bulletin please click below:
> http://listserv.onlineinc.com/unsubscribe.aspx?bounce.13321.395...@bounce.infotoday.com
>
> Copyright 2010, Streaming Media, a Division of Information Today,
> 143 Old Marlton Pike, Medford, NJ 08055-8750, USA; (609) 654-6266,
> http://www.infotoday.com
>
> Problems with this message? Send an e-mail to h...@emediapro.com.  
> Please do
> not reply to this message, as it was sent from an unattended mailbox.
>
> -- 
> --
> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> --
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Live stream blog from an event

[Rupert Howe]

For advice from people on this list:
Verdi ran 24 hours 24 artists last year, getting 24 people to VJ their  
own session, hosting live and mixing in pre-recorded video, using  
Mogulus (now Livestream.com) - would be worth asking him for his  
experience & advice.  And John Leeke's been doing live video  
conferences from http://www.historichomeworks.com for years.
Phil Campbell in the UK has an "Ammobox" which he puts together for  
people to do easy live streaming of conferences.  Worth checking it  
out - http://ammoboxproject.com - and talking to him - 
http://twitter.com/philcampbell

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 23 Apr 2010, at 08:18, David Jones wrote:

> Hi
> I've been offered a gig to do a live streaming blog from an event for
> 3 days in the US, payed for by the (big) company running the event.
> Never done anything like this before, I usually just run my talking
> head YouTube blog from my lab at home. Never live streamed before, and
> never had a paid video blogging gig like this before. They would even
> widely market me leading up to the event as being there live blogging.
>
> It would involve the usual stuff for a live event blog, walking around
> booths, interviews with key people and random visitors, and a wrap-up
> at the end of the day.
>
> No idea of the full details yet, but I thought I'd ask any general
> advice from those who have done full day/multiday live blogs.
> I don't know as yet if I'd just be the on-screen talent or they would
> expect me to do everything and provide all the gear and streaming
> infrastructure etc, I'm assuming the former, and that I'd get plenty
> of technical help. That wouldn't stop me bringing my own kit "just in
> case" though.
>
> What about stuff like recording live streams for edit/playback later?,
> what type of gear is needed, typical streaming software etc.
> How much actual "live" work would be typical for a full day event? etc
> I'm assuming that live streams would go "live" of course, and
> in-between they would show previously recorded segments?
>
> I've got plenty of ideas of course, but it would be good to hear from
> anyone who's been there and done that.
> So any and all tips appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> Dave.
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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

[Rupert Howe]

Brilliant.

On 16 Apr 2010, at 19:59, 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
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] external hard drives for editing?

[Rupert Howe]

I did a bit of research on this before buying 2 months ago, because  
I've been burnt by Lacie more than once - and kept going back because  
of price.  But they end up costing twice as much because they fail so  
quickly.

I was recommended Western Digital by a couple of pro video people, but  
read some bad reviews online.

The one that seemed most attractive & recommended, and which I ended  
up getting, was the G-Tech 2TB G-Raid.  Cost me £250, which is about  
US $375.  It's doing really well so far, but then they always seem to  
be fine until one day they fail to mount...

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 16 Apr 2010, at 16:20, David Lee King wrote:

> I'd like to move to doing more editing of videos and music off of an
> external hard drive... I've used LaCie drives for that before, and  
> that
> seemed to work ok. But wanted to find out you amazing video peeps  
> suggest -
> what would you buy/what do you use?
>
> Thanks!
>
> David Lee King
> davidleeking.com - blog
> davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog
> twitter | skype: davidleeking
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Stock/Royalty-Free Music sources

[Rupert Howe]

Awesome - thanks Adam.  Checking them out now.

David, that's just what I was talking about.  The Apple loops & tunes  
are great - just expanding my library :)

Would still like to hear anyone else's suggestions.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 16 Apr 2010, at 16:05, Adam Quirk wrote:

> Sound Dogs isn't free, but it's cheap:
> http://www.sounddogs.com/catsearch.asp?Type=1
> <http://www.sounddogs.com/catsearch.asp?Type=1>
> <http://www.sounddogs.com/catsearch.asp?Type=1>FreeSound is great  
> for sound
> design: http://www.freesound.org/
>
> <http://www.freesound.org/>ABFUKU is free 8bit music:
> http://www2c.biglobe.ne.jp/~abfuku/musori/muso_idx.html
>
> <http://www2c.biglobe.ne.jp/~abfuku/musori/muso_idx.html>Kariokebar  
> is free
> midi: http://www.kariokebar.com/MIDI/indexA.html
> <http://www.kariokebar.com/MIDI/indexA.html>
>
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 10:43 AM, David Lee King  >wrote:
>
> > For me, the primary source is ... my Mac.
> >
> > I just use iMovie/garageband, and either use one of the royalty- 
> free tunes,
> > or create my own using loops.
> >
> > Not quite what you were talking about, but fits well, I think.
> >
> > David Lee King
> > davidleeking.com - blog
> > davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog
> > twitter | skype: davidleeking
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Rupert Howe 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'm trying to expand my list of stock/royalty-free music sources -
> > > particularly websites. Which supply tracks that can be used for
> > > commercial as well as non-commercial use?
> > > Do you have your own favourites or lists? I'll compile & blog a  
> full
> > > list to share.
> > >
> > > Rupert
> > > http://twittervlog.tv
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [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]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] Stock/Royalty-Free Music sources

[Rupert Howe]

I'm trying to expand my list of stock/royalty-free music sources -  
particularly websites.  Which supply tracks that can be used for  
commercial as well as non-commercial use?
Do you have your own favourites or lists?  I'll compile & blog a full  
list to share.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

Re: [videoblogging] 7D workflow for PC

[Rupert Howe]

Further to my post yesterday, I just saw this.  Steve Jobs replied to  
an email from someone asking about the future of final cut.

http://macsoda.com/2010/04/13/steve-jobs-next-final-cut-studio-will-be-awesome/

He said:
"Next release will be awesome."

Um.  That's it.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:59, 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
>
>
>
>

Re: [videoblogging]

[Rupert Howe]

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]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Streamy disaster

[Rupert Howe]

:)
And both in the right spirit, bringing the right attitude, more social  
& level, without the nastiness of tone & the money issues.


On 16 Apr 2010, at 00:26, Roxanne Darling wrote:

> LOL! Irina brings the drama and fun factor and I sure as hell can  
> organize.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Rupert Howe   
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I thought earlier today that Irina should have been organising the
>> Streamys. Now I realise that Irina & Rox is the dream team. Someone
>> should tell them.
>>
>>
>> On 15 Apr 2010, at 23:57, Roxanne Darling wrote:
>>
>>> Irina: agreed on the dubious pay for play and "it feels good to be
>>> recognized for hard work."
>>> Rupert: agree that having more women involve might have helped and
>>> tech
>>> should have been the "given."
>>> Quirk: "People are rightfully pissed." Yeah.
>>> Mark: Disrespecting the audience is a clear problem, I agree. If you
>>> are
>>> going to make it R-rated, it's your choice, though you better pre-
>>> announce
>>> that.
>>>
>>> As a group, internet video has so much potential. But many of those
>>> who are
>>> inspired to take the lead on these things also seem to have serious
>>> issues
>>> with maturity and basic event promotion competence. I produced a
>>> podcamp
>>> here in 2008 - over 400 attended live and thousands more via
>>> livestream.
>>> There were no streakers or swear words and wow what a great time we
>>> had!
>>> Aunties were blogging by the end of the 2 days and our tag hit #1 on
>>> Twitter
>>> and Flickr - from a big crowd of newbies. We did no traditional
>>> marketing or
>>> advertising - all via social networks and WOM. So I know this can
>>> all be
>>> done using the tools we love and sharing the ideas we know are
>>> relevant and
>>> in demand.
>>>
>>> I detached from being part of the in crowd years ago, both because
>>> of the
>>> geographical isolation in Hawaii (I just can't drop in to the LA and
>>> NYC
>>> meetings and those crowds seem to forget there are others who don't
>>> show up
>>> in the F2F events) as well as not fitting in one of the mainstream
>>> categories. Surely our 4+ years, 760 episodes, nearly 3 M views, and
>>> literally saving a few lives has a place somewhere? :-)
>>>
>>> Often a big fail can open things up for enlightenment. I'm putting
>>> my vote
>>> in that direction.
>>>
>>> Now, onto brighter and happier thoughts!
>>>
>>> Love,
>>>
>>> Rox
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Irina >> %40gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> chance's story showed that charging nominees for participation is a
>>>> dubious
>>>> undertaking -- since without nominees there would be no industry
>>>> and no
>>>> "award show" in the first place. second of all, making anyone feel
>>>> left out
>>>> (since this is the web, which is pretty much an all-inclusive  
>>>> type of
>>>> environment) with special entrances and seating is another weird
>>>> idea.
>>>>
>>>> work on getting sponsors to pay for things so people dont have to.
>>>> thats
>>>> what sponsors are for. ergo, free food and liquor if i can help it.
>>>>
>>>> trust me, people brought their friends and kids to the vloggies and
>>>> the
>>>> winnies too. because its fun. and because it feels good to be
>>>> recognized
>>>> for
>>>> hard work.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Rupert Howe
>>>> > 40twittervlog.tv>>
>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm also glad that it wasn't like the Oscars. LA & NY people
>>>>> consolidating their power.
>>>>>
>>>>> And Chance's personal story is depressing, but really... the whole
>>>>> thing reads like a Greek tragedy. Pride before the fall. I mean,  
>>>>> he
>>>>> *really* thought he was going to the Oscars?? And brought all his
>>>>> friends and colleagues... and their children?! WTF.
>>>>>
>>>>> And I can't a

Re: [videoblogging] Streamy disaster

[Rupert Howe]

I thought earlier today that Irina should have been organising the  
Streamys.  Now I realise that Irina & Rox is the dream team.  Someone  
should tell them.

On 15 Apr 2010, at 23:57, Roxanne Darling wrote:

> Irina: agreed on the dubious pay for play and "it feels good to be
> recognized for hard work."
> Rupert: agree that having more women involve might have helped and  
> tech
> should have been the "given."
> Quirk: "People are rightfully pissed." Yeah.
> Mark: Disrespecting the audience is a clear problem, I agree. If you  
> are
> going to make it R-rated, it's your choice, though you better pre- 
> announce
> that.
>
> As a group, internet video has so much potential. But many of those  
> who are
> inspired to take the lead on these things also seem to have serious  
> issues
> with maturity and basic event promotion competence. I produced a  
> podcamp
> here in 2008 - over 400 attended live and thousands more via  
> livestream.
> There were no streakers or swear words and wow what a great time we  
> had!
> Aunties were blogging by the end of the 2 days and our tag hit #1 on  
> Twitter
> and Flickr - from a big crowd of newbies. We did no traditional  
> marketing or
> advertising - all via social networks and WOM. So I know this can  
> all be
> done using the tools we love and sharing the ideas we know are  
> relevant and
> in demand.
>
> I detached from being part of the in crowd years ago, both because  
> of the
> geographical isolation in Hawaii (I just can't drop in to the LA and  
> NYC
> meetings and those crowds seem to forget there are others who don't  
> show up
> in the F2F events) as well as not fitting in one of the mainstream
> categories. Surely our 4+ years, 760 episodes, nearly 3 M views, and
> literally saving a few lives has a place somewhere? :-)
>
> Often a big fail can open things up for enlightenment. I'm putting  
> my vote
> in that direction.
>
> Now, onto brighter and happier thoughts!
>
> Love,
>
> Rox
>
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Irina  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> chance's story showed that charging nominees for participation is a  
>> dubious
>> undertaking -- since without nominees there would be no industry  
>> and no
>> "award show" in the first place. second of all, making anyone feel  
>> left out
>> (since this is the web, which is pretty much an all-inclusive type of
>> environment) with special entrances and seating is another weird  
>> idea.
>>
>> work on getting sponsors to pay for things so people dont have to.  
>> thats
>> what sponsors are for. ergo, free food and liquor if i can help it.
>>
>> trust me, people brought their friends and kids to the vloggies and  
>> the
>> winnies too. because its fun. and because it feels good to be  
>> recognized
>> for
>> hard work.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Rupert Howe  
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm also glad that it wasn't like the Oscars. LA & NY people
>>> consolidating their power.
>>>
>>> And Chance's personal story is depressing, but really... the whole
>>> thing reads like a Greek tragedy. Pride before the fall. I mean, he
>>> *really* thought he was going to the Oscars?? And brought all his
>>> friends and colleagues... and their children?! WTF.
>>>
>>> And I can't agree with the "It's terrible for the industry!" people.
>>> It will be *good* for the profile of web video, not bad. I've seen
>>> enough intentionally controversial and offensive theatre in London  
>>> and
>>> Edinburgh to know that controversy drives box office success, mass
>>> media interest and general awareness. Even if the show itself is a
>>> train wreck.
>>>
>>> So - it might be bad for the reputation of Tubefilter and the
>>> producers and the chances of getting sponsors for next year's  
>>> awards -
>>> but not bad for web TV. More people will hear about web shows now -
>>> in the knowledge that there was a big Awards ceremony for them.
>>>
>>> In everything I've read, everyone's giving them a pass on the tech
>>> problems and castigating them for the tone. Come on.
>>>
>>> They should be more ashamed of the tech problems than the poor  
>>> taste.
>>>
>>> I mean, they were obviously *trying* to be 'edgy'. They got what  
>>> they
>>> wanted, like ego-crazed geek frat boys

Re: [videoblogging] Re: 7D workflow for PC

[Rupert Howe]

wow - great news!  i didn't even know Lightworks existed any more -  
haven't heard of it for years.  had an editor who used it in 2001 for  
some short TV films - thought at the time that it was much better than  
Avid.  very like FCP.  used to be used by lots of editors in the UK  
for both film & TV.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



On 15 Apr 2010, at 21:20, Jay dedman wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Adam Quirk  
> 
> wrote:
> > I'm so used to Premiere at this point that I probably won't switch  
> unless
> > some open-source competitor comes along with all the features I  
> need.
>
> 
> "*Oscar and Emmy award-winning editing software 'Lightworks is going
> open-source*."
> http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/04/oscar-winning-video-editor-goes-open.html
>
> Jay
>
> --
> http://ryanishungry.com
> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> 917 371 6790
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: 7D workflow for PC

[Rupert Howe]

I loved using Vegas when I had to use PCs for a couple of projects  -  
but the thing that attracts me to Premiere is the way that Adobe CS  
Apps work together, particularly Premiere & After Effects.


On 15 Apr 2010, at 18:06, Heath wrote:

> 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
>

Re: [videoblogging] 7D workflow for PC

[Rupert Howe]

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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 7D workflow for PC

[Rupert Howe]

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
>
>
>
>

Re: [videoblogging] 7D workflow for PC

[Rupert Howe]

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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Pinnacle Studio HD

[Rupert Howe]

Did you ever try the trial version of Vegas?  They say they can cut  
anything without conversion.  And their export options are pretty  
comprehensive, so should avoid you having to use Handbrake.
I had the odd glitch trying to trim Xacti h.264 clips with it when I  
last used it a couple of years ago, but that was also a couple of  
versions ago, so it might be better at it now.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 15 Apr 2010, at 14:27, David Jones wrote:

> For those playing along at home...
>
> Been using Ulead VideoStudio 12 for many years now, and the last few
> months for the HD H.264 direct editing as you may know. I needed to
> use Handbrake also for final output conversion.
> So I decided to give the trial version of Pinnacle Studio HD 14 a go.
>
> Just did a blog with it, and with no help or references had my latest
> blog done very quickly and smoothly within an hour on my first try, I
> really like it, quite intuitive.
> H.264 1280x720 HD playback is instant, and editing is generally pretty
> smooth, better than Ulead. Still a bit jerky on the clip trim bars,
> but I often don't have to use them thanks to the audio waveform
> display below the video, so I can see when I start speaking and move
> the bar directly to it instead of start/spot listening I have to do
> with Ulead.
>
> It outputs just fine directly in 1280x768 30fps MPEG4 for Youtube. So
> no more having the two step process of outputting in MEG2 and then
> converting to MPEG4 with handbrake.
> Final HD rendering seemed quite slow at 4Mpbs, and it wouldn't let me
> do high bandwidth stuff in the background like play a youtube video
> properly, but it's faster than the previous two step MPEG2-MP4
> process.
>
> But for some reason it's "Best Quality" direct upload Youtube setting
> is only 640x360, so that feature is useless, so I'll juts output to
> MP4 HD and upload to Youtube manually.
> The iPod feature is useless too, it won't output in my desired
> 480x272, nor will it allow me to customise the video data rate. So
> I'll still have to use Handbrake for this.
> The MP3 audio output option is very nice, but it seems to have a bug
> in that I select 64kbps and it always gives me 192kps.
>
> So if you are looking to do direct H.264 MPEG4 video editing (like
> directly from a Sanyo Xacti or similar) then I'd recommend you give
> Pinnacle Studio 14 a try. Looks like I'll be buying this one and
> making the switch.
>
> Dave.
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Google to open source VP8

[Rupert Howe]

Mozilla reckon that Firefox handles 30% of worldwide web access.  And  
you can bet it's an even higher percentage of people who watch online  
video.  Even after IE9  with HTML5 becomes widely used in a few years,  
that 30% lack of support for h.264 (or more by then) will be a big  
issue for anyone wanting to use HTML5 for video. Unless Mozilla change  
their mind.

Interesting to see what Microsoft will do about video codecs in IE9.   
Have they said? I haven't seen.  If they do allow ogg/vp8 to be used  
with the video tag, will it just be the 5% Safari users and iPad/ 
iPhone users who'll be left out?  That'd be pretty decisive and easy  
to prioritize for producers.  And if they fail to support it, and just  
support h.264 & their own codecs, it'll be just the 30+% Firefox &  
Opera users who are in the minority, tipping the balance the other way  
- but not decisively, just annoyingly?  Given Microsoft's record of  
driving web professionals mad with their browsers, you have to worry  
that sanity will not prevail here.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 14 Apr 2010, at 22:43, elbowsofdeath wrote:

> Forgot to say that its also possible that VP8 support could be added  
> to Flash if it starts to take off, which would be a workaround for  
> some browsers that may not support it directly.
>
> Whatever happens, h.264 remains the best option for maximum browser  
> compatibility for a while, due to flashs ability to play it and the  
> number of browsers that can play it directly. Couple this with the  
> large quantity of video already in h.264 format and you have a  
> situation where sites can start offering their videos to some  
> browsers without using flash without too much effort at all. This at  
> least gives html5 video tag some chance to be used for real,  
> regardless of what happens over a longer period of time with other  
> formats like VP8.
>
> Apple are clearly promoting html5 in quite an aggressive way as a  
> major part of their war with flash on iphones and ipads, and have  
> apparently been trying to convince various large websites to make  
> versions of the site that dont use flash for video, with mixed  
> results so far.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve Elbows
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "elbowsofdeath"   
> wrote:
>
> >
> > It really will be interesting to see what happens with browsers,  
> Google will certainly make Chrome attractive by presumably  
> supporting all 3 of the formats we are talking about, some others  
> may follow suite as a result, or if h.264 dominates html5 video on  
> the web then Firefox may end up having to do a workaround to provide  
> support too, such as relying on the OS or a plugin to do the job.
> >
> > Flash is a big winner so long as there is html5 video codec mess  
> in the browser arena. This is another reason I dont want the battle  
> to be too complex & prolonged.
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Google to open source VP8

[Rupert Howe]

I hadn't seen this news. But I'd been thinking about it only a couple  
of days ago, wondering if they were going to do it, after their move  
towards ogg.

I'm so bored by the idea of even more epic codec battles.  Apple/ 
Safari/iPhone/iPad in h264 versus Google/Chrome/Phones/Set Top Box/etc  
in ogg/vp8.  Versus Microsoft and whatever they choose to do.  No  
compatibility between browsers for HTML5.
Seems like Apple are hardening their position on various things, and  
so are Google, Adobe, etc.  Pretty boring for all of us, having to  
cater for all or pick sides.

Great that Google Open Sourced VP8, though.  A bright spot in all of  
this, hopefully.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 12 Apr 2010, at 23:55, Michael Verdi wrote:

> This is pretty awesome:
> http://newteevee.com/2010/04/12/google-to-open-source-vp8-for-html5-video/
> That could seriously change the codec equation for the better.
>
> - Verdi
>
> -- 
> Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia &  
> Lymphoma Society.
> http://training.michaelverdi.com
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Streamy disaster

[Rupert Howe]

I'm also glad that it wasn't like the Oscars.  LA & NY people  
consolidating their power.

And Chance's personal story is depressing, but really... the whole  
thing reads like a Greek tragedy.  Pride before the fall.  I mean, he  
*really* thought he was going to the Oscars?? And brought all his  
friends and colleagues... and their children?!  WTF.

And I can't agree with the "It's terrible for the industry!" people.   
It will be *good* for the profile of web video, not bad.  I've seen  
enough intentionally controversial and offensive theatre in London and  
Edinburgh to know that controversy drives box office success, mass  
media interest and general awareness.  Even if the show itself is a  
train wreck.

So - it might be bad for the reputation of Tubefilter and the  
producers and the chances of getting sponsors for next year's awards -  
but not bad for web TV.  More people will hear about web shows now -  
in the knowledge that there was a big Awards ceremony for them.

In everything I've read, everyone's giving them a pass on the tech  
problems and castigating them for the tone.  Come on.

They should be more ashamed of the tech problems than the poor taste.

I mean, they were obviously *trying* to be 'edgy'.  They got what they  
wanted, like ego-crazed geek frat boys.  The whole thing reeks of not  
enough women in charge.  What a surprise.

But surely the one thing that should have been *flawless* is the  
technical delivery.

It's not that hard to get sound right.  You just have to hire a live  
event sound engineer who knows what they're doing - and a live  
broadcast mixer & director & engineer who know what they're doing (I  
mean, it's LA, for God's sake).

And do rehearsals and sound checks.  And if you can't do proper  
rehearsals in the venue, don't use the venue.  If they were expecting  
750,000 viewers, it should have been ALL about the flawless live  
streaming of the content and perfect sound, surely - not about  
ohmygosh the Orpheum Theatre and the self-satisfied LA types in the  
room?

And above all, given that it's about web video, it should have been  
short.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv








On 12 Apr 2010, at 23:17, 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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Happy VideoBloggingWeek2010

[Rupert Howe]

I always forget that the week starts on Sunday.  Sunday's my offline  
day.  Actually, I've just finished 6 full weeks of offline days - and  
haven't got back to my 12seconds yet, so I might crank that up again.

Twitter hashtag is #vbw2010, it seems.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 12 Apr 2010, at 03:21, David Lee King wrote:

> Me too!
> http://davidleeking.com/etc/2010/04/11/teaching-video-during-videoblogging-week-2010/-
> Sorta funny. I'm actually teaching a basics of video class to
> librarians
> in this video with agood friend of mine ... at a library conference.  
> So
> posting a video snippet of teaching video during videoblogging  
> week.
> Wow!
>
> David Lee King
> davidleeking.com - blog
> davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog
> twitter | skype: davidleeking
>
> On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 9:08 PM, ryanne hodson  >wrote:
>
> > hey i made a video too!
> >
> > http://ryanedit.blogspot.com/2010/04/videoblogging-week-2010-sunday.html
> >
> >
> > -ryanne
> >
> > --
> > http://RyanIsHungry.com
> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/ryanne
> > AIM: VideoRodeo
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 6:41 PM, mgmoon  wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > That's the whole idea. VBW challenges people to come up with a  
> video per
> > > day in one week. It might not be pretty, but another snippet in  
> time has
> > > been captured.
> > >
> > > I watched your video... and I thought it was wonderful.
> > > Thanks for sharing.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > http://vlog.mikemoon.net
> > >
> > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com  %40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > "compumavengal"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I stumble in but I got one up. It ain't pretty but it is done.
> > > >
> > >
> > http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com/2010/04/videoblogging-day-1-2010-lemonade.html
> > > >
> > > > Gena
> > > > http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com
> > > >
> > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com  %40yahoogroups.com
> > >,
> > > "mgmoon"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, it's Sunday.
> > > > > It starts today... Videobloggingweek2010.
> > > > > April 11-17
> > > > >
> > > > > Grab your camcorders and shoot some video.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike
> > > > > http://vlog.mikemoon.net
> > > > >
> > > > > p.s. Here's Day 1's vlog:
> > > > > http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2010/04/11/geo-fricken-caching/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [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]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Happy VideoBloggingWeek2010

[Rupert Howe]

I always forget that the week starts on Sunday.  Sunday's my offline  
day.  Actually, I've just finished 6 full weeks of offline days - and  
haven't got back to my 12seconds yet, so I might crank that up again.

Twitter hashtag is #vbw2010, it seems.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 12 Apr 2010, at 03:21, David Lee King wrote:

> Me too!
> http://davidleeking.com/etc/2010/04/11/teaching-video-during-videoblogging-week-2010/-
> Sorta funny. I'm actually teaching a basics of video class to
> librarians
> in this video with agood friend of mine ... at a library conference.  
> So
> posting a video snippet of teaching video during videoblogging  
> week.
> Wow!
>
> David Lee King
> davidleeking.com - blog
> davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog
> twitter | skype: davidleeking
>
> On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 9:08 PM, ryanne hodson  >wrote:
>
> > hey i made a video too!
> >
> > http://ryanedit.blogspot.com/2010/04/videoblogging-week-2010-sunday.html
> >
> >
> > -ryanne
> >
> > --
> > http://RyanIsHungry.com
> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/ryanne
> > AIM: VideoRodeo
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 6:41 PM, mgmoon  wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > That's the whole idea. VBW challenges people to come up with a  
> video per
> > > day in one week. It might not be pretty, but another snippet in  
> time has
> > > been captured.
> > >
> > > I watched your video... and I thought it was wonderful.
> > > Thanks for sharing.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > http://vlog.mikemoon.net
> > >
> > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com  %40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > "compumavengal"  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I stumble in but I got one up. It ain't pretty but it is done.
> > > >
> > >
> > http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com/2010/04/videoblogging-day-1-2010-lemonade.html
> > > >
> > > > Gena
> > > > http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com
> > > >
> > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com  %40yahoogroups.com
> > >,
> > > "mgmoon"  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Well, it's Sunday.
> > > > > It starts today... Videobloggingweek2010.
> > > > > April 11-17
> > > > >
> > > > > Grab your camcorders and shoot some video.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike
> > > > > http://vlog.mikemoon.net
> > > > >
> > > > > p.s. Here's Day 1's vlog:
> > > > > http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2010/04/11/geo-fricken-caching/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [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]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercue 2010

[Rupert Howe]

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]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] Job at PCF/Miro

[Rupert Howe]

http://worcester.craigslist.org/web/1684265692.html

Participatory Culture Foundation (creator of Miro - getmiro.com) is  
looking to fill a part-time web and technical role. We are an open- 
source, non-profit software development organization.

Our organization has strong technical and design capabilities, but we  
need additional hands on deck to keep our websites up to date. This  
job will entail taking on various projects to update, revise, and  
maintain our websites.


REQUIREMENTS

Above all, we are looking for someone who is extremely reliable and  
consistent and has strong html + css skills.

Please let us know if you have any of the following skills. None are  
required, but may be helpful:

- Familiarity with SVN or Git
- Javascript experience
- PHP experience
- Other programming experience
- Design skills
- Experience with open-source or free culture projects

Send a resume and a brief introductory note to: nicho...@pculture.org

Pay will be hourly, depending on experience. For more about our  
organization, please visit pculture.org

Thanks!

Location: telecommute
Compensation: based on experience
Telecommuting is ok.
This is a part-time job. 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Check week at blip.tv

[Rupert Howe]

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]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Check week at blip.tv

[Rupert Howe]

That old video of yours about your mum - interrupted with your Coke ad  
- springs to mind, Jay - is that still online somewhere?

On 9 Apr 2010, at 13:47, 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]
>
>
>
> 
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Re: [videoblogging] Check week at blip.tv

[Rupert Howe]

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]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Check week at blip.tv

[Rupert Howe]

Congratulations!

On 9 Apr 2010, at 02:28, David Jones wrote:
>
>
> I just hit my first anniversary video blogging too.
>
> Dave.
>
> _


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

[Rupert Howe]

Thanks Tom - don't feel shy about adding your podcast URL as a  
signature, for our easy access.
I usually do (so do most people here, I think) I was just being lazy  
today because I was talking to myself.

Rupert and Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 31 Mar 2010, at 19:04, Tom Dolan wrote:

> Hi Rupert,
>
> If I can break into this conversation between you andRupert, I'd
> like to say that in the situation you're describing, I don't think
> stereo audio is an issue. I capture my video podcast audio with a mono
> lavaliere and convert with QT Pro and the results are  very good. The
> audio goes in as mono but comes out as mono in both channels. You can
> check my podcast
> if you like and hear for yourself. I've just opened it up so it still
> needs some content but please check it out. Stereo in the field could
> be a complication you could easily avoid and I would unless the
> situation demanded otherwise.
>
> Good Listening & Good Luck, and now feel free to continue your
> conversation with Rupert.
>
> Tom Dolan
>
>
> On Mar 31, 2010, at 4:51 AM, Rupert Howe wrote:
>
>> excellent - i can have a thread all to myself.
>> well, Rupert, it seems to me after a moment's consideration that the
>> Stereo videomic is probably better for atmosphere and group
>> discussions, whereas the more directional mono videomic would be
>> better for interview use. does that sound right?
>> Yes, Rupert, that would seem to make sense.
>> Thanks.
>> No problem.
>>
>> On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:37, Rupert Howe wrote:
>>
>>> here's another general question for the audiophiles like Richard -
>> is
>>> there really much difference between a mono and a stereo mic at this
>>> level? surely in most cases - recording someone talking, or
>> capturing
>>> general atmos for instance, both channels will be almost exactly the
>>> same? and the range and response isn't improved by having stereo, is
>>> it? what am i missing?
>>>
>>>
>>> On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:30, Rupert Howe wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode
>>>> mono & stereo videomics? I know they're popular with videobloggers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Tom Dolan
> tomjdo...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> 
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

[Rupert Howe]

Hey Rupert, here's a video where Gene Fama gives a great comparison of  
the two mics in action on a 5D Mk2, which I think is the camera you're  
thinking of attaching it to, isn't it?
http://vimeo.com/2707206

On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:51, Rupert Howe wrote:

> excellent - i can have a thread all to myself.
> well, Rupert, it seems to me after a moment's consideration that the
> Stereo videomic is probably better for atmosphere and group
> discussions, whereas the more directional mono videomic would be
> better for interview use. does that sound right?
> Yes, Rupert, that would seem to make sense.
> Thanks.
> No problem.
>
> On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:37, Rupert Howe wrote:
>
> > here's another general question for the audiophiles like Richard -  
> is
> > there really much difference between a mono and a stereo mic at this
> > level? surely in most cases - recording someone talking, or  
> capturing
> > general atmos for instance, both channels will be almost exactly the
> > same? and the range and response isn't improved by having stereo, is
> > it? what am i missing?
> >
> >
> > On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:30, Rupert Howe wrote:
> >
> >> Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode
> >> mono & stereo videomics? I know they're popular with videobloggers.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

[Rupert Howe]

That didn't even occur to me.  Nice tip.

On 31 Mar 2010, at 13:04, Quirk wrote:

> Hey Ruperts, one advantage to stereo is having a backup channel for  
> loud situations. Live music for example. You set one channel at a  
> reasonable level, and set the other maybe 6db below it. That way if  
> you get any crazy peaks you can just delete the standard channel  
> during that scene and double up your backup.
> AQ
> Sent via dynamic wireless technology device
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Rupert Howe 
> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:51:41
> To: 
> Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic
>
> excellent - i can have a thread all to myself.
> well, Rupert, it seems to me after a moment's consideration that the
> Stereo videomic is probably better for atmosphere and group
> discussions, whereas the more directional mono videomic would be
> better for interview use. does that sound right?
> Yes, Rupert, that would seem to make sense.
> Thanks.
> No problem.
>
> On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:37, Rupert Howe wrote:
>
> > here's another general question for the audiophiles like Richard -  
> is
> > there really much difference between a mono and a stereo mic at this
> > level? surely in most cases - recording someone talking, or  
> capturing
> > general atmos for instance, both channels will be almost exactly the
> > same? and the range and response isn't improved by having stereo, is
> > it? what am i missing?
> >
> >
> > On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:30, Rupert Howe wrote:
> >
> >> Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode
> >> mono & stereo videomics? I know they're popular with videobloggers.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> 
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

[Rupert Howe]

excellent - i can have a thread all to myself.
well, Rupert, it seems to me after a moment's consideration that the  
Stereo videomic is probably better for atmosphere and group  
discussions, whereas the more directional mono videomic would be  
better for interview use.  does that sound right?
Yes, Rupert, that would seem to make sense.
Thanks.
No problem.

On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:37, Rupert Howe wrote:

> here's another general question for the audiophiles like Richard - is
> there really much difference between a mono and a stereo mic at this
> level?  surely in most cases - recording someone talking, or capturing
> general atmos for instance, both channels will be almost exactly the
> same?  and the range and response isn't improved by having stereo, is
> it?  what am i missing?
>
>
> On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:30, Rupert Howe wrote:
>
>> Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode
>> mono & stereo videomics? I know they're popular with videobloggers.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> 
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

[Rupert Howe]

here's another general question for the audiophiles like Richard - is  
there really much difference between a mono and a stereo mic at this  
level?  surely in most cases - recording someone talking, or capturing  
general atmos for instance, both channels will be almost exactly the  
same?  and the range and response isn't improved by having stereo, is  
it?  what am i missing?


On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:30, Rupert Howe wrote:

> Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode
> mono & stereo videomics? I know they're popular with videobloggers.
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

[Rupert Howe]

Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode  
mono & stereo videomics?   I know they're popular with videobloggers.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Video Blogging Week 2010

[Rupert Howe]

Bring it on.

On 24 Mar 2010, at 12:21, mgmoon wrote:

> Okay folks, get those camcorders outta the closet and prepare to  
> shoot 7 videos in 7 days.
>
> Come on... take a couple minutes and write down some ideas.
> You have a couple weeks before it starts.
>
> I know you can do it! get involved. Be a playa.
>
> Here's some ideas. Please feel free to add to the list.
> Show your special talent (underarm farts, whistle, touch forehead  
> with tongue, whatever)
> Do you have a passion?
> How do you spend your pastime?
> Read a good book lately? Review it.
> Got a tattoo no one has seen...yet?
> 12seconds.tv has a daily challenge.
> Sing a song.
> What's for dinner?
> Do a dance.
> Get naked.
> Give the camcorder to your kids.
> Pull out a box of old pictures. Tell the stories, capture the history.
> Film your lawn or garden. A point in history.
> Capture pet moments.
> Lip-sync a song.
>
> Help your fellow content-challenged fellow vloggers with some ideas.
>
> Come on you wusses. 7 videos... no rules! Anything goes! Free For All!
>
> Mike
> http://vlog.mikemoon.net
>
> VLOG ON BITCHES
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Josh Leo  wrote:
> >
> > The dates are set, prepare yourself, start forming ideas for  
> videos, and get
> > ready to pose 1 video a day for 7 days!
> >
> > http://www.videobloggingweek2010.blogspot.com
> >
> > --
> > Josh Leo
> >
> > www.JoshLeo.com
> > www.SlowLorisMedia.com
> > www.WanderingWestMichigan.com
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] German vloggers before 2005

[Rupert Howe]

Newteevee did a recap of the last decade in online video - makes for  
interesting and nostalgic reading:
http://newteevee.com/2010/01/01/the-decade-in-online-video-part-1-the-early-years/

On 24 Mar 2010, at 00:32, Jay dedman wrote:

> > I have been searching for a while but with little success. Is  
> within our group any German vlogger who had started his vlog before  
> 2005? The only one I could find is "greenhorn" and now I try to  
> contact him via email and maybe now it works via our group...
> > But has anyone a hint for me? Or hadn't there existed any German  
> videoblogs before that time?
>
> Hey Jenna--
>
> To be honest, there weren't any vloggers really anywhere before 2004.
> People experimented with posting video online, but Adrian Miles was
> the only person I found who had used a blog to post videos on any kind
> of regular basis.
>
> Ive never heard of "greenhorn".
>
> Jay
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Mefeedia State of the Vlogosphere 2010

[Rupert Howe]

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]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Veoh is dead

[Rupert Howe]

It's not unlike TV, really.  There are thousands of bad channels, a  
lot of shitty formats, and a small amount of shows of real quality.

In terms of availability of IPTV, and the development of web TV, it's  
like TV was back in the mid 1940s.

The money and infrastructure in TV allows the development of quality  
drama and comedy, which is a really hard thing to achieve (even in cop  
show & sitcom formats).

In TV, huge systems are in place to support and promote good drama.   
Periodically, TV drama production comes under attack from insecure  
executives - and so drama shifts from channel to channel (HBO has had  
a good decade for instance) but if you look at the machinery behind  
even a mediocre soap, it's massive.  Writers, script editors,  
producers, commissioning editors, channel controllers, schedulers,  
directors, performers, technicians, marketing departments.

At some level, all these people - at the top of their professions -  
are all giving input to find the best material and iron out the creases.

I don't know how independent web producers are ever going to replicate  
this level of infrastructure and support - I'm trying to figure that  
out.  But as much as some of us might feel squirmy about awards  
ceremonies, I think the Streamys help a lot by pointing out the good  
stuff.   Otherwise, where do we look to find it?  Meanwhile, the age  
of widespread IPTV is speeding towards us.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 19 Feb 2010, at 21:09, Adam Quirk wrote:

> You're awesome Rox. Thanks for persevering and doing what you love.
>
> You are a great example to point to when people start out in this
> medium, or any medium actually. Some people get into something like
> web video or blogging and make something for a couple months, then get
> frustrated when nobody is paying them $100k for their work. As 99% of
> newcomers drop off after a few weeks or months because of their
> unfulfilled feelings of entitlement, the people who are really
> passionate push on and keep doing what they love regardless of
> financial reward.
>
>  As to Sull's points, there's a much larger quantity of
> creators these days, I agree, but the percentage of good stuff to bad
> stuff has not increased with the level of technology. The signal to
> noise is obviously much worse than when there were 100 of us making
> stuff. And the quality has suffered due to an influx of Hollywood
> types trying to stuff Hollywood productions into a web video box.
> Which usually doesn't work because they are generally out of work in
> the first place because they weren't very good at their jobs in
> Hollywood, and even if they were, that doesn't translate very well on
> the web. That translation problem could soon be a thing of the past
> since everything will be funneled to our TVs in the coming years, but
> it still doesn't solve the problem of bad writing and acting.
> 
>
> Disclosure: I am a Streamys judge and IAWTV member. There is some damn
> good material out there. It's not easy to find. The technical arts are
> on par with the best TV and Hollywood. The writing/acting stuff needs
> a lot of work.
>
> --
>
> Adam Quirk
> http://wreckandsalvage.com
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Roxanne Darling   
> wrote:
> > I am enjoying reading all these comments - though my head is like a
> > ping pong ball banging back and forth as I agree with virtually  
> all of
> > the statements!
> >
> > Most of all though I have had a lifelong irritation with virtually
> > every industry I have worked in that values the stuff more than the
> > people. Conferences will pay for fancy programs and glitch and glam
> > yet want speakers to pay their own way. Businesses will spend  
> $40,000
> > on a one seat bathroom, and kvetch about a website that costs $5000
> > (that is a real example from one of our earlier clients.) Velvet  
> seats
> > for the theatre and fancy cocktail parties for the donors yet the
> > ballerinas make pennies. So that prob is nothing for us to feel
> > special about. :-)
> >
> > Our show is approaching it's 4th anniversary - we were "late" to the
> > party but there is still energy there I cannot define. At it's root,
> > people feel good when they watch it.  For me, after 757 episodes, it
> > still has meaning, and we still have ideas, but it is much harder to
> > find the time. We've had almost no sponsorship or financial  
> support in
> > the entire term.
> >
> > Anyway, I just posted the first thing in several weeks - it's a nice
> > oddball show that speaks to the videoblog sensibility not the hulu
> > one, that I hope might help you feel good too.
> > http://www.beachwalks.tv/2010/02/15/beach-walk-757-waves-washing-over-us/
> >
> > Though I really do like watching 30Rock on hulu from the laptop  
> while
> > cooking dinner!
> >
> > Love,
> >
> > Rox
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Michael Sullivan  > wrote:
> >> i dont think their is much getting around the fact that making  
> good money
> >> w

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

[Rupert Howe]

OK, this is my last post on this subject, because you haven't engaged  
with any of my arguments.

But I must point out that you've changed your opinion from the  
statement that started all this in the first place.

You just said to Adam:
> Once again, I was speaking about low res in general, not about you or
> your circumstances personally.
>
and:
> I did read it and I knew that you chose to downscale to 640x480.
> Nothing wrong with that, that's your choice, and I'd probably do the
> same thing if I deemed the quality was not acceptable at 640x480.
>

But the whole reason this discussion started in the first place was  
because your original comment was:

> Adam:
> > Call me old school, but I still publish my vlog in 320x240. For a  
> couple of reasons. My old Flip shoots at 640x480 and at the native  
> size its pretty crummy. Scaled to quarter screen it tightens up and  
> cleans up the noise considerably.
> >
> > Also theres nothing in my vlog that needs to be seen at HD  
> resolution. Waste of bandwidth.
>
> David:
> If you follow that logic to its logical conclusion, then why have a
> video blog at all?, why not just an audio podcast?
> Or at least why not 160x120 for even more bandwidth saving and  
> speed?  A video blog should be all about the video (ok audio is super
> important too, but beside the point), the bigger and more glorious the
> source material the better. Try watching 320x240 full screen...
> I know people who watch my video blog like a TV show and put it on
> full screen while having their breakfast etc.

Nothing about it being fine for Adam to shoot in low res.   "I shoot  
in 320" > "why have a video blog at all".

That's why I replied.

I'm sort of frustrated with your implication that my response has been  
to take this personally - it is purely a reaction to your general  
statement about what people (or Adam) should not be doing.

Once again (yawn) my point is that it's not enough just to tell  
everyone they should shoot in as high a resolution as possible.  There  
are *many* good reasons people shoot small, which I've set out  
numerous times.I've taken time to spell them out.  To have a  
discussion.  Any acknowledgement?

Anyway - enough already.  I hope you remember that I think your vlog  
is awesome, and this is *not* some kind of personal thing as you  
implied.  Just if anyone says "why have a video blog at all" to "i  
shoot in 320", you can bet I'm going to reply, fairly vigorously.  To  
anyone, in whatever forum.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv






On 11 Feb 2010, at 21:09, David Jones wrote:

>
> Go for your life, I can handle it, I stand by my comments.
> Many people take what I say personally, or mistakenly think I'm
> personally attacking them in some way, that's sad. My comments are
> meant for general discussion and food for thought.
>
> > If you bothered to read my original post before getting your  
> pompous high and might knickers in a twist you'd have noticed that I  
> too share this marvelous thing you call CHOICE.
>
> I did read it and I knew that you chose to downscale to 640x480.
> Nothing wrong with that, that's your choice, and I'd probably do the
> same thing if I deemed the quality was not acceptable at 640x480. In
> fact, from memory I think I did do that on my first blog with a web
> cam.
> Once again, I was speaking about low res in general, not about you or
> your circumstances personally.
>
> > I dont 'film' at 320x240. In fact i dont 'film' at all, and  
> neither do you. Get your technicalities right before you bandy silly  
> ideas around. You shoot video, so technically you record.
>
> Perfectly common usage, you knew what I mean, and I'm sure everyone
> else did too.
> So what's your point?, that my comments somehow have less validity
> because I chose to use the term "film" instead of "shoot"?
> I'll call it what I want, thank you very much.
>
> So my idea of advising people to at least film (sorry, shoot) and if
> possible upload at the best quality they reasonably can do so users
> have a choice is "silly"? YouTube recommend it too, so please do
> explain how that's silly...
>
> And as I've said I'm also an advocate of optimising your downloads for
> certain needs like podcasting etc. I do it myself. But I don't *only*
> upload at 320x240, because I know people like to view my blog in many
> different ways, and my blog is mostly a talking head that can be
> viewed adequately at 320x240. So I give them a choice and upload the
> best material I have available.
>
> > And I RECORD my video at 640x480. I CHOOSE to downscale to 320x240  
> because my expert eye has determined that the image looks better  
> that way. It benefits from the reduced noise and softened image.
>
> Sure, you'll get no argument from me.
>
> > My full frame 480p image is captured on a $100 flip, whereas your  
> image is captured on a $400 HD cam. If i were shooting content that  
> I thought worthy of such a camera I would certainly invest in one. I  
>

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

[Rupert Howe]

Good story :)

I used this argument last time we had the HD discussion - it died  
without comment, except from Adam.

Apart from the waste of energy & unnecessary cost that someone will  
have to pick up somewhere, we *will* face repercussions from  
unnecessary use of huge HD video files.

Cisco reported in June 2009 that:
"Internet video is now approximately one-third of all consumer  
Internet traffic, not including the amount of video exchanged through  
P2P file sharing.
The sum of all forms of video (TV, video on demand, Internet, and P2P)  
will account for over 91 percent of global consumer traffic by 2013.  
Internet video alone will account for over 60 percent of all consumer  
Internet traffic in 2013."
My ISP here in our London office has started throttling our ADSL  
broadband - presumably because we use lots of video.  Upload speeds  
have died - it took me 45 minutes to upload a 30mb video yesterday.
It's been happening every day for the last month - our usage goes up,  
the speeds die.  We're supposed to have 10mbps unlimited bandwidth  
connection.  And the ISP (not my choice) is the main telecom company  
here: BT, who control the network.

A sign of things to come.

I have heard that speeds are also an issue in Australia (where Adrian  
and Dave both are) - and a friend in South Africa tells me that  
streaming YouTube videos is a problem, even in downtown Johannesburg.

Certainly, in my book this is another big reason why it's not OK to  
tell people they shouldn't be shooting in low resolutions.  If you  
don't need to use HD (and why do you need to use HD for personal /  
family videoblogging like Adam & I do?) then using it is akin to using  
a gas guzzling SUV to do the school run.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 11 Feb 2010, at 10:11, Adrian Miles wrote:

> hi all
>
> On 11/02/2010, at 8:13 PM, adammerc...@att.net wrote:
>
> > Also there is the question of bandwidth and I've had this argument
> > with several people, and I'm often in the minority. But i believe my
> > position so I stand by it. Bandwidth is not free, contrary to
> > popular opinion. Someone somewhere is paying for it. We wil all pay
> > for it if the ISPs want to throttle their networks thanks to every
> > tom dick and harry publishing HD video of their son on a swing, thus
> > choking up the networks with unnecessary bits. your content may very
> > well warrant the higher quality. Thats your choice. Miine does not.
> > Thats my choice.
>
> really want to second this. In a world where sustainability really is
> an issue network sustainability (which includes bandwidth) *is*
> significant. You can't pump big video into most of the world. For some
> projects that does not matter, but for many it does. I remember
> teaching Masters students in Norway who scoffed at what I showed them
> in QuickTime for compression and editing, pointing out that downstairs
> they had Avids, 3 chip cameras etc. Half of these students were on
> scholarships from the developing world. I asked them "so, when you go
> home and out to a school, do you want everyone to be able to shoot and
> edit and publish video for a $30 bit of software, or do you want to
> tell them that they can only tell their stories when they learn how to
> use, own, maintain, an Avid?" Every one of them shut up and started
> playing. Today I could have the same conversation with them about
> bandwidth.
>
> cheers
> Adrian Miles
> adrian.mi...@rmit.edu.au
> Program Director, Bachelor of Communication Honours
> vogmae.net.au/research/contact-me/
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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

[Rupert Howe]

On 10 Feb 2010, at 23:57, David Jones wrote:
> Sure, but that whole argument is such a big red herring and so
> entirely beside the point it's not funny!
>
His argument was not beside the point.  It was about people using  
videoblogging for more than talking to the camera.  Which is what  
quite a lot of people here do.

> Almost every video blogger *wants* the best possibly quality video
> they can get, they aren't keeping it small for some artistic reason.
> They keep it small because they are (or think they are) constrained by
> some technical limitation.
>
Almost every video blogger?  Care to back this up a little?  It's just  
not true.  In my experience, most people videoblogging are using  
what's convenient to them.  Whether it's an iSight or their phone  
camera or the camera they happen to have.   And a balance of cost to  
convenience.  Remember all the trouble you had cutting H264 MP4

And then there are the many many filmmakers you dismiss as 'arty  
farty', quite a few of whom (like me) do not just want to rack up the  
pixel count so that we can have massive resolution.  As I explained  
before (no response?) - for a *lot* of reasons.  Aesthetics, ease,  
storage, bandwidth, cutting, etc etc ETC.

>
> Deliberately limiting your source material because you have some
> preconceived notion about how it should be viewed, is in my view a
> silly thing to do.
>
?!

> But hey, if you want to go all arty-farty and shoot
> small, be my guest, just don't argue that's even close to what most
> video bloggers want, you'd be way off the mark.
>
Equally, please don't argue that you know what most video bloggers  
want.  You'd be way off the mark.  And 'arty farty'??

>
> > All power to full screen video, but please don't make an argument  
> that
> > this is the only way to approach video online.
>
> I'm not.
> I'm simply saying that any videoblogger should be making use of the
> best possible resolution they can easily do.
>
Finally - everything Adrian and I have said is about why they can do  
whatever they want - not because they *should* be doing anything.   
There are a lot more things at play here than just shooting at the  
best possible resolution.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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

[Rupert Howe]

TOTALLY disagree, but you know this already from earlier discussions.

You are doing a very different kind of videoblog from what most people  
do - it's great that you love doing it in HD, but I really really  
strongly disagree that "Any video blogger who is filming and/or  
uploading in 320x240 only is doing their effort a real disservice I  
think."

As for "If you follow that logic to its logical conclusion, then why  
have a video blog at all?, why not just an audio podcast? Or at least  
why not 160x120 for even more bandwidth saving and speed?" -  
R

As someone who has posted hundreds of videos in 320x240 for just short  
of 5 years now, I'm not a podcaster.   320x240 videos are clearly  
visible and can be *great* quality - unlike 160x120.   Remember, TV is  
only 480 lines high.

It's about the *content*, not the size of the window or the number of  
pixels.  Particularly for videoblogging.  And there's actually a lot  
of benefit to be had from working with lofi, non HD technology - apart  
from aesthetically, there are benefits for file storage, cutting,  
upload and transmission.

Especially when most people watch most video embedded somewhere  
between 320 and 640.

For a whole bunch of reasons, I wouldn't be videoblogging if I had to  
do everything in HD.  I'm still posting 320x240 via 12seconds every  
day - and other people may not see the point in what I do, but I love  
it.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



On 10 Feb 2010, at 07:49, David Jones wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:19 PM, adammerc...@att.net
>  wrote:
> >
> > Call me old school, but I still publish my vlog in 320x240. For a  
> couple of reasons. My old Flip shoots at 640x480 and at the native  
> size its pretty crummy. Scaled to quarter screen it tightens up and  
> cleans up the noise considerably.
> >
> > Also theres nothing in my vlog that needs to be seen at HD  
> resolution. Waste of bandwidth.
>
> If you follow that logic to its logical conclusion, then why have a
> video blog at all?, why not just an audio podcast?
> Or at least why not 160x120 for even more bandwidth saving and speed?
>
> A video blog should be all about the video (ok audio is super
> important too, but beside the point), the bigger and more glorious the
> source material the better. Try watching 320x240 full screen...
> I know people who watch my video blog like a TV show and put it on
> full screen while having their breakfast etc.
>
> The beauty of modern hosts like YouTube are that it offers whatever
> resolution the user desires. Defaults to 360p to save bandwidth, but
> offers selectable 480p, 720p, or higher for those who chose it.
> I now always shoot and upload in 1280x720 because:
> a) I have the camera that can do it
> b) People have different needs (and bandwidth isn't an issue for
> probably the majority of people these days)
> c) And you never know what the future holds. I didn't want to look
> back in a few years and wish I had shot those previous hundred
> episodes in HD for whatever reason.
>
> Any video blogger who is filming and/or uploading in 320x240 only is
> doing their effort a real disservice I think.
> My $400 HD cam was the best money I ever spent.
>
> Dave.
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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

[Rupert Howe]

No - you're right - Blip have earned loyalty with great features &  
service.  Despite earlier praise for YT, I can see myself continuing  
to use Blip for personal videoblogging.

But according to their ToS, they prohibit pretty much any commercial  
use that's not creation of a Show:

Content that has as its sole or primary purpose to advertise a  
particular product or service that, in the sole judgment of Blip.tv,  
does not otherwise have redeeming value to the community. Blip.tv may  
allow the uploading of some such content for a fee, at its sole  
discretion. Such advertising content may be treated differently than  
other content (i.e. through indications that it is an advertisement,  
or exclusion from some indices or searches).

There's no way any commercial entity can let themselves use Blip to  
embed videos, for fear of having their account deleted.  Sad, really -  
but I see why: it limits their content & bandwidth & storage costs to  
those producers who are more likely to add Blip's adverts to their  
videos.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

.
On 8 Feb 2010, at 17:38, Heath wrote:

> 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]
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Non-XLR hand held Microphone

[Rupert Howe]

Awesome!

On 9 Feb 2010, at 14:22, Cris Thomas wrote:

>
> Just to follow up on my original microphone questions...
>
> I ended up going with two Mics. A Rode Video Mic that attaches to  
> the cold shoe and inputs dual channel audio (I don't know if it is  
> really stereo or not, probably not). All of the reviews I read on  
> this Mic said it was awesome so I expected about half of that, but I  
> was wrong. It is awesome, especially at the price.  I did one  
> interview with the camera and mic on a tripod about three feet away  
> while I and the interviewee sat on a couch in a noisy hotel lobby,  
> The mic got minimal background noise and both of our voices are very  
> clear. I am very impressed.
>
> As a bonus for me anyway, since it is larger than my camera, it  
> makes the camera look a little more professional and people don't  
> look at me like I am just some dweeb with a camera.
>
> As for the original question about hand held Mics I was in a hurry  
> and didn't have much budget so I opted for the Radio Shack $25 Mic  
> with the build in 1/4 cable. I added an 1/8 adapter and plugged it  
> into the camera. I covered the mic with a $5 pop filter and did my  
> interviews that way. All of them came out great, even when I didn't  
> have the mic very close to the interviewees mouth the sound was  
> still more than acceptable.  It only records in mono but I was able  
> to copy the left channel to the right side without to much trouble  
> in FCE. I'm sure you audiophiles are aghast that I used a RatShack  
> microphone instead of some $200 thing but it works for me with what  
> I'm doing. I'm happy with it.
>
> I made a home made Mic flag for it that came out pretty well. So  
> between the MIc flag, the Rode Mic and the tripod I think I made  
> quite the impression. I had a few people ask me what TV station I  
> was recording for!
>
> I did discover that I need a lighting solution, but I'll make new  
> post for that question.  Thanks everyone for your input!  This is a  
> great list!
>
> - C. Thomas
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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

[Rupert Howe]

Thanks :)

You add &showinfo=0 at the end of the video URL in the embed code,  
before the " quote.  You need to add it twice - the URL is repeated in  
the Object and the Embed section of the code.  Thus:

http://www.youtube.com/v/3-QYMb6l0FE&hl=en_US&fs=1&showinfo=0 
">http://www.youtube.com/v/3-QYMb6l0FE&hl=en_US&fs=1&showinfo=0 
" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always"  
allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340">

YouTube into iTunes podcasting is still a problem, weirdly - but  
there's a service called http://ytpodcaster.com/ which gives you an  
iTunes feed address for your MP4 files - which allows you to subscribe  
in iTunes, Zune, etc.  You can add this address to the Podcast store.   
The only problem is that ytpodcaster might disappear or be taken down  
by Google - for some reason they like to kill user-generated hacks -   
so it's not as secure as if it were a service offered by YouTube  
itself.  Hopefully it will be eventually, though.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 6 Feb 2010, at 03:18, Tom Dolan wrote:

> Hi Rupert,
>
> Good perspective. Thank you. My blog is almost ready for prime time
> and to test the workings of videos I downloaded 2 videos that I had
> parked on YouTube. I'm pretty impressed with the simplicity of the
> embed and the quite nice functioning of the videos. I've been
> preparing to use blip and one of the reasons was because they seem to
> be an entryway to iTunes. What about that?
>
> Also, I'm not really into coding although I've been directed to make
> some changes with wordPress and I've been fine with it. Where exactly
> would I post "&showinfo=0" in the embed code to clean-up the player?
> Thanx, and btw, the video of the Alexander Tech. is nice: calm,
> honest, conversational.
>
> Tom Dolan
>
> On Feb 5, 2010, at 5:05 PM, 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]
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
> Tom Dolan
> tomjdo...@gmail.com
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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

[Rupert Howe]

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]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] looking for examples of good direct to camera "video diary" type vlogs

[Rupert Howe]

Now I'm back, I'll briefly add... most video diaries are not the  
classic to-camera video diaries that you see characters on TV shows &  
films doing - those that are to-camera tend to be somewhere between  
being editorial opinions and stand up comedy.  Personal video diaries  
online have tended to be more like classic home movies - people  
pointing the camera away from them, videoing the people and things  
around them, and then cutting them into simple sequences.  Like Jay's  
video of his mother's last days, posted in November:
http://momentshowing.net/2009/11/video-sure/

One of my favourite types of video diary has been the videoblog  
travelogue as mastered by Ryanne & Jay - just filming moments without  
commentary or music and stitching them together - the natural sounds  
forming a rhythm:
http://tinyurl.com/ryanne

I have taught videoblogging to teenagers, and most of them were quite  
bored by videoblogs and video diaries - even those that I thought were  
amazing or funny.  I figured that this was because most video diaries  
and blogs are by adults, about adult lives.  This is one of the  
reasons Anne Frank is so accessible to young people - she's young.   
And one of the reasons why the nightmarish fake video diary of Fred,  
which I linked to before, has been so phenomenally popular - he's a  
kid.  Ditto the other fictional phenomenon, LonelyGirl15...

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv




On 2 Feb 2010, at 08:48, Rupert Howe wrote:

> I would recommend some of my own stuff:
> http://twittervlog.tv/popular-videos/
> but i fear the language may be a little rich for 13 year olds.
>
> Ze Frank's The Show is a good place to start.  Very creative to-camera
> videoblogging - it ran from 2006-7.
>
> He defined the style that you can see a lot of on YouTube now - with
> fake video diaries like Fred
> http://www.youtube.com/user/Fred
>
> and videobloggers you see popping up in the Most Viewed section on
> YouTube:
> http://www.youtube.com/videos
>
> From this list, Mike Moon does a great regular video diary at the
> moment:
> http://vlog.mikemoon.net
>
> People like Ryanne Hodson and Michael Verdi did awesome video diary
> work from 2004-6.
> http://ryanedit.blogspot.com
> http://michaelverdi.com
>
> I'll let others jump in with specific examples of videos because I
> suddenly have to run to take my daughter to school!
>
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
>
>
>
> On 2 Feb 2010, at 01:54, Christopher wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> I got question. Just started a new WGBH Lab open call inspired by
>> The Diary of Anne Frank. For this call for entries, we are asking
>> for video diary entries, hence the connection to Anne Fank
>>
>> It's targeted to youth media makers 13 and up so I started a section
>> called "video to inspire"...basically it's section for me share
>> example videos of what we might be looking for but also so show
>> methods that kids might be able to express themselves via video.
>>
>> can you all suggest some good examples out the video blogging
>> community that I could link to or embed?
>>
>> Let me know.
>>
>> Chris
>> The WGBH Lab
>> e-mail: chris_hasti...@wgbh.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> 
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Re: [videoblogging] looking for examples of good direct to camera "video diary" type vlogs

[Rupert Howe]

I would recommend some of my own stuff:
http://twittervlog.tv/popular-videos/
but i fear the language may be a little rich for 13 year olds.

Ze Frank's The Show is a good place to start.  Very creative to-camera  
videoblogging - it ran from 2006-7.

He defined the style that you can see a lot of on YouTube now - with  
fake video diaries like Fred
http://www.youtube.com/user/Fred

and videobloggers you see popping up in the Most Viewed section on  
YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/videos

 From this list, Mike Moon does a great regular video diary at the  
moment:
http://vlog.mikemoon.net

People like Ryanne Hodson and Michael Verdi did awesome video diary  
work from 2004-6.
http://ryanedit.blogspot.com
http://michaelverdi.com

I'll let others jump in with specific examples of videos because I  
suddenly have to run to take my daughter to school!

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



On 2 Feb 2010, at 01:54, Christopher wrote:

> Hi all,
> I got question. Just started a new WGBH Lab open call inspired by  
> The Diary of Anne Frank. For this call for entries, we are asking  
> for video diary entries, hence the connection to Anne Fank
>
> It's targeted to youth media makers 13 and up so I started a section  
> called "video to inspire"...basically it's section for me share  
> example videos of what we might be looking for but also so show  
> methods that kids might be able to express themselves via video.
>
> can you all suggest some good examples out the video blogging  
> community that I could link to or embed?
>
> Let me know.
>
> Chris
> The WGBH Lab
> e-mail: chris_hasti...@wgbh.org
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: youtube sound

[Rupert Howe]

Give it a few hours - try again.   Chances are it'll pass.  In the  
meantime, try exporting and uploading a different version - use an  
Apple iPod setting as an easy option.  And also export a 10 second  
clip from your video and upload to see if the same thing's happening.
Rupert

On 1 Feb 2010, at 23:29, loretabirkus wrote:

> I use H264, picture 1280x720, audio AAC (44.1 samplerate, 96  
> bitrate). I cleaned the sound with Audacity and then added some  
> bass, just to diminish the background noise.
>
> I can't upload the video since it's for my client and I would hate  
> for it to go public before he sees it. But I've used same settings  
> on all my video uploads for Youtube and never experienced any  
> problems. And the video and sound quality were very good when  
> uploaded. This is the first one I have this type of issue with. I  
> found in one forum a discussion about voice delay, but no solution  
> was suggested.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Loreta
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman   
> wrote:
> >
> > > So..now that I edited the video and uploaded to the Youtube I'm  
> experiencing some sort of video behind the sound issue. The raw  
> compressed file is looking good, but when I upload it to Youtube,  
> the visual goes faster than the sound. Is it just me or Youtube  
> doing smth wrong today? Have you had any issues like that? I did fix  
> the raw sound to reduce the hum. Could that be doing something to  
> the video on Youtube?
> >
> > It'd be helpful if you send a link to the Youtube video so we can  
> see
> > it. Also be good to know how you compressed the video and fixed the
> > sound.
> >
> > Jay
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://ryanishungry.com
> > http://momentshowing.net
> > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> > 917 371 6790
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Zoom H4N Audio Recorder

[Rupert Howe]

Thanks, Brook - I haven't seen the noise mentioned by anybody else.
What mics do you use with its mini-jack inputs? I'm presuming from  
what you say that you don't use your XLR mics via a beachbox?
R

On 29 Jan 2010, at 21:42, Brook Hinton wrote:

> The H4n has XLR inputs but unfortunately the mic preamps are really  
> noisy. I
> almost got one, since I have AT4073's which are really fantastic  
> shotgun
> mics, but the noise was a deal killer.
>
> The Olympus LS10 can be found pretty cheap these days and while it  
> doesn't
> have XLR inputs it beats out the H4N in terms of specs and has VERY  
> quiet
> preamps (though it works better with externals as the built-ins have a
> non-defeatable low-cut filter, which I would always engage in the  
> field
> anyway so its not a big deal, esp. if you EQ).
>
> The new Sony PCM-M10 is supposed to be fantastic and in field tests  
> beats
> out much higher end units. Its built-in mics have been described as  
> among
> the best available for recorders of this type.
>
> I'd go for either of those over the Zoom unless XLR was absolutely
> essential. I ended up with an LS10 over the Sony but only because a  
> good
> used unit saved me $100 over the new price.
>
> Brook
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Roger Conant   
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi: The Zoom H4N is a great tool. it records good sound with an  
>> nice on
>> board adjustable mic. But, as you mentioned, it also takes XLR  
>> inputs at mic
>> or line level. It also does lots of other cool things --making it a  
>> kind of
>> audio Swiss army knife. For instance, it acts as a USB interface  
>> between
>> your computer and any audio equipment you plug into it-- making it  
>> really
>> handy. It can also serve as an SD card reader if you need it. The  
>> menu
>> features are a little slow to fire up, but other than that , its a  
>> cool
>> tool. Roger.
>>
>> To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com 
>> From: rup...@twittervlog.tv 
>> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:55:24 +
>> Subject: [videoblogging] Zoom H4N Audio Recorder
>>
>>
>> Further to our discussions about sound, I saw a Zoom H4N audio
>>
>> recorder in action on a Canon 5D Mk2 shoot a couple of weeks ago, and
>>
>> I'm going to get one for myself.
>>
>> It's a portable audio recorder with XLR inputs and on board mics.
>>
>> There's a video about using it with DSLRs here (including mounting it
>>
>> on your camera), which is part infomercial for Zoom, part infomercial
>>
>> for Zacuto, but still has a lot of interesting stuff in it.
>>
>> http://vimeo.com/4782593
>>
>> Rupert
>>
>> http://twittervlog.tv
>>
>>
>> __
>> Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
>> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390707/direct/01/
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> ___
> 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]
>
>
>
> 
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

[videoblogging] Zoom H4N Audio Recorder

[Rupert Howe]

Further to our discussions about sound, I saw a Zoom H4N audio  
recorder in action on a Canon 5D Mk2 shoot a couple of weeks ago, and  
I'm going to get one for myself.

It's a portable audio recorder with XLR inputs and on board mics.

There's a video about using it with DSLRs here (including mounting it  
on your camera), which is part infomercial for Zoom, part infomercial  
for Zacuto, but still has a lot of interesting stuff in it.
http://vimeo.com/4782593

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

Re: [videoblogging] camera features

[Rupert Howe]

A good quality camera shouldn't have too much problem with tape  
noise.   An in-store test isn't going to help you because of the  
background noise.Better to google.   But even if there's no real  
hum from the tape mechanism, the on-board mic is going to be pretty  
poor quality anyway compared to an external.

I would spend more time worrying about the quality of the image,  
colours and low light performance.  Then lens is probably more  
important than anything.

AVCHD should be fine with iMovie 09.

HD still isn't necessary for web viewing - particularly 1080.  Most  
web video is seen at somewhere between 320x240 and 640x480.  Most HD  
is 720.  But things are changing and HD futureproofs you for a while.   
And a good quality HD camera with a good lens should give you nice  
images even if you export at much lower resolution.

Play with the Sanyo.  I have found the pistol grip to be the best way  
to hold a camera, especially for videoblogging.  I wish every small  
camera was built like that.  And when you're not hand-holding it, you  
can put it on a little tripod, so it doesn't matter.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 28 Jan 2010, at 21:05, Tom Dolan wrote:

> Hey Group-folk,
>
> In preparation for a visit to the photo shop next week, I'd like to
> run some features by you and pleze comment if you can. I'll be
> shooting for the web, to put in web sites, mine and maybe others. I'll
> edit in iMovie'09 on an intel iMac.
>
> I've been thinking future=Flash memory, but many Tape cameras are
> still made like the VIXIA HV40. Is Tape worth considering??
>
> People complain about motor noise in the audio. How will I know if the
> motor noise is being captured or not? Will an in store test tell me?
>
> Is AVCHD difficult to work with/download.and finally is HD
> necessary or preferable for web viewing?
>
> BTW, the Sanyo specs look good but the form factor discourages me.
>
> Gotta move forward with my project so thanx for the input/feedback.
>
> Tom Dolan
> tomjdo...@gmail.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] avoiding/cleaning hum noise

[Rupert Howe]

and set to stun!

On 27 Jan 2010, at 06:59, Joly MacFie wrote:

> > Record the room silent and then lay that beneath everything else.  
> (No
> > room is actually silent and this is standard practice.)
> >
>
> and invert the phase!
>
> -- 
> --
> Joly MacFie 917 442 8665 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> --
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] camera

[Rupert Howe]

I still love the Canon HV20.  It's been superseded a couple of times,  
and I've heard much less about the HV30 and HV40 than I did about the  
HV20.  Everybody wanted one when they came out 2-3 years ago. I used  
to borrow a friend's for work, and never got round to getting my own.   
I've yet to see another camera in the same range with the same quality.

  I loved Quirk's video for the Navlopomo game, shot on an HV20,  
albeit with a 35mm Nikon lens adapter, which is probably more  
expensive than the camera (?).  http://www.vimeo.com/7730272
Or Valdez's videoblogging with HV30: http://www.vimeo.com/6143526

So if I had $600/800, I'd probably get one of those.

But I don't know what 2009's hottest mid-range HD camcorder was.

If I won a few grand on the lottery, I'd get myself an EOS 5D Mk2 with  
a nice lens, like a shot.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 26 Jan 2010, at 04:43, Tom Dolan wrote:

> Hey Vid-folk,
>
> I had an interesting idea and I want to run it by you. A local but
> large pro camera shop might take in trade, a complete Pentax 35mm
> outfit. Xcellent condition, lenses, motor, etc... towards something
> else. I won't get what I think it's worth but I might be offered enuf
> to let it go. Now,
>
> Here's the conundrum: at different price levels starting lo and ending
> at about $6/800..(OK so I'm optimistic), what would you suggest I
> consider? It's got to work with iMac-iMovie'09, have an external mic,
> and I prefer flash memory over tape/hard-drive. BTW, I was surprised
> to see a Sanyo model mentioned here several times. I don't see them
> featured on the review sites, usually the same canon/sony/pana/etc
> stuff. My 1st 16mm camera was a Sanyo and it was pretty good.
>
> So what video cameras would YOU trade the 35mm system for? and I'm not
> into the Flip style camera for now.
>
> Go for it...and Thanx.
>
> Tom Dolan
> tomjdo...@gmail.com
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] avoiding/cleaning hum noise

[Rupert Howe]

Do you get a hum wherever you film inside, or particularly in one  
location?  Lots of household/office appliances that we can't hear or  
filter out make a big hum when recorded - air con, computers, fridges,  
etc.  Try being ruthless about shutting everything off when filming.   
Keep different types of cables away from each other, and if you need  
to cross them, do so at right angles.
Test whether it's the tape mechanism that's making a lot of noise by  
monitoring the audio with a good pair of headphones at a distance from  
the camera, both with and without the tape running.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 26 Jan 2010, at 08:38, loretabirkus wrote:

> Hello again,
>
> I would like to know how you manage to record a sound with minimum  
> hum in a room environment. I have a good microphone that I use for  
> my filming, but I always get a huge hum sound if I film inside.
>
> I used Audacity to eliminate the background noise, but sometimes it  
> doesn't work and it makes the voice sound weirdly alien :)
>
> I even purchased a new Rode Videomic to see if there's any  
> difference in the hum sound volume and I still get it with this mic  
> as well.
>
> Any tips how to eliminate as much as possible the hum noise during  
> filming so that there's less work during editing? And how to  
> eliminate the hum noise and keep a descent quality during the  
> editing process?
>
> I'm stuck on this now as I'm trying all ways (Audacity, Adobe  
> Audition, Magic Audio cleaning softwares) to remove the noise and I  
> don't get the results that I want.
>
> Thanks much!
>
> Loreta
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of internet TV & videoblogging

[Rupert Howe]

lol!

On 26 Jan 2010, at 10:26, Adrian Miles wrote:

> sort of like a Steenbeck? :-)
>
> On 19/01/2010, at 10:16 AM, Richard Amirault wrote:
>
> > I would LOVE to edit with a touch screen. just seems like it'd be
> > more fun
> > and direct.
>
> cheers
> Adrian Miles
> adrian.mi...@rmit.edu.au
> Program Director, Bachelor of Communication Honours
> vogmae.net.au
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Winkball.com - new British vlogging service

[Rupert Howe]

Seems it was bum advice that converter & software would be v expensive  
for Mac - mainly because I have bought very expensive kit for this in  
the past.

But yeah, the biggest pain in the ass in the whole process is time  
wasted on things like importing your clips onto your computer.  It  
makes so much difference to your flow when you can just zap in the  
clips from a USB cable or a memory card, and get cutting.  Even  
capturing from digital tape seems like a ridiculous activity, now,  
whenever I have to do it.  I have a bunch of stuff that I'm not  
getting around to doing anything with because it's sitting on tape.

And to do it for a relatively low quality analogue image - when great  
quality & portability & importability is available so cheaply - is  
something that I'd recommend only if you really can't afford the  
cheapest good new camcorders like the Zi8 and the Flip.

Rupert

On 24 Jan 2010, at 23:54, Jay dedman wrote:

> > The iSight is about as good as it gets.
> > You'll have trouble importing hi-8 into your Mac, unless you want to
> > fork out for final cut pro and an analogue/digital converter box.
> > Would be cheaper and much better just to buy a Kodak Zi8 or a Flip
> > Mino HD for $100-200. Or even the previous version of either: the  
> Zi6
> > or the Flip SD, for slightly less.
>
> I agree with Rupert that you can certainly capture a hi8 video onto
> your computer with converters...but you'll cause yourself a lot of
> headache. Be easier to just invest in an inexpensive, high quality DV
> camera.
>
> Jay
>
> --
> http://ryanishungry.com
> http://momentshowing.net
> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> 917 371 6790
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Winkball.com - new British vlogging service

[Rupert Howe]

The iSight is about as good as it gets.
You'll have trouble importing hi-8 into your Mac, unless you want to  
fork out for final cut pro and an analogue/digital converter box.   
Would be cheaper and much better just to buy a Kodak Zi8 or a Flip  
Mino HD for $100-200.  Or even the previous version of either: the Zi6  
or the Flip SD, for slightly less.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 24 Jan 2010, at 21:56, Tom Dolan wrote:

> Hey Jay,
>
> I'm sittin here reading Steve's book when a thought occurs. My father-
> in-law gave me a Sharp video camera when we left Japan to return to
> the US. It's a Hi8 camera with all the menus in Japanese, but Masako
> translated them for me so I could use the camera. The output is Hi8
> tape of course with RCA cables too. I stopped using it because I
> figured the world is digital and time has passed it by. But maybe I
> could still use it...thinkin budget.
>
> Of course if it required an expensive converter of some sort I'd
> rather put the money into a new camera...any thoughts.
>
> Also, I am making the vid-pod in my studio using the iSight on the
> iMac. Looks ok so far. Would I get any noticeable increase in
> production values if I got the Logitech webcam for Mac?
>
> Thanx,
> Tom
>
> On Jan 23, 2010, at 7:38 PM, Jay dedman wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Tom Dolan 
>> wrote:
>>> Thanx for the response Jay. I've been monitoring this group for
>> awhile
>>> and I'm impressed with the (mostly) positive energy here.  I
>>> appreciate your input.
>>
>> We used to have big flame wars and dramafests every six months or so.
>> Pretty tame these days. Think people are all just busy creating and
>> living their life.
>>
>>> I do have a channel up on blip.tv and have only
>>> uploaded a test file to see if I could get it to work.  It's been
>>> there for 2 + months while I've been getting ready to get real. I'll
>>> inform the group about the blog-n-channel when I get further along.
>>> Any opinions on tube mogul?
>>
>> Seems like a great option if you want to spam multiple video sites at
>> once. http://heyspread.com/ is another one. It all depends on what
>> your goal is. I'd focus on making the best videos you canthen
>> worry about all the promotion etc.
>>
>> Steve Garfield just published a book called "Get Seen":
>> http://www.amazon.com/Get-Seen-Secrets-Building-Business/dp/ 
>> 0470525460
>> He probably answers a lot of questions for the beginner on, well,
>> getting seen.
>>
>> Jay
>>
>> -- 
>> http://ryanishungry.com
>> http://momentshowing.net
>> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
>> 917 371 6790
>>
>>
>
> Tom Dolan
> tomjdo...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> 
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

[videoblogging] Winkball.com - new British vlogging service

[Rupert Howe]

I just found
http://www.winkball.com

They're sending reporters to events to get talking heads reactions to  
things like current affairs issues.  Users are also recording their  
own To Camera vlog pieces.

They say they have 829 video blogs on their site.  Brits are less  
outgoing than Americans, and so have been reticent about vlogging -  
and only tend to do it through corporate channels, not independently.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

[videoblogging] Mefeedia's State of the Vlogosphere 2010

[Rupert Howe]

I meant to post about this 10 days ago, but then got frantic and ill  
and it got lost in the mix.

Mefeedia's State of the Vlogosphere 2010 makes for a very interesting  
read:

http://blog.mefeedia.com/vlog-2010

While the level of activity on this list has slowly dropped over the  
last 3 years, the number of vlogs that Mefeedia tracks has risen from  
20,000 to 110,000 since 2007.

As I said here before, I think this is going to be a big year for  
vlogging, despite the breakdown in the vibrancy & output of our  
community.

Vloggers are the only producers of original content on YouTube who  
regularly attract millions of views, apart from animators.  All the  
other most popular videos are clips of MSM.

Check out the Mefeedia report via the link above (some highlights  
listed below):

With 36%, YouTube is the strongest single source of video
(14% Blip, 31% independent & other)

International vlog numbers are growing faster than the U.S.
After English, Spanish-speaking vlog are growing the fastest.

The average pro-vlogger syndicates their video to 3.6 sites.

Feedburner is no longer the “default” syndication mechanism

MRSS tools have become much more sophisticated

IPhone was the fastest growing mobile device for watching video and  
highest video consumption in 2009 (by 6x)

1024×768 is most popular screen resolution (40%), followed by 1280×800  
(20%), 1280×1024 (10%)

Playstation 3 is most popular for TV viewing, followed by the Nintendo  
Wii.

The average watch time for short-form is 1:15 min and the average for  
long-form is 8:50 min.

People are watching more short-form than long-form video.

--

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] YouTube Gets A Makeover

[Rupert Howe]

Google have stripped down and improved the YouTube video page design.

More about it at this ReadWriteWeb article:
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/youtube_gets_a_makeover_launches_new_video_player_watch_pages.php

I like it - it's much cleaner.  The right hand side is all related  
videos and a 'featured video'.

There's a pull-down menu for choosing what resolution you want to see  
it in - up to 1080p.

There are two separate buttons to let you see it in it's intended  
resolution and in fullscreen.

The Share options have changed - much simpler and clearer.

Bad points:
The 'More Videos by this User' panel is now even more hidden away -  
it's now accessed via a link at the top of the page, next to the  
channel name, saying "34 videos >>"

There's no more 1-5 ratings, which is probably a good thing - but  
they've replaced it with badly weighted "Thumbs Down" and "Like (Add  
To Favourites)" buttons, which I think raises the bar for saying you  
like something rather to high.  Maybe I like something, but don't want  
to add it to my favourites?  But I can imagine a lot of YT morons just  
clicking Thumbs Down on a video five seconds in and then clicking away.

The biggest problem with their pages, of course, is that they still  
haven't done anything about the comments.   They should filter for  
obscenities better, and not just allow flagging for spam.  Kids love  
watching youtube videos of cartoons and cute animals - but even  
cartoons have just unbelievable angry hateful comments beneath them.
I don't really want to have to stop my daughter watching funny things  
on YouTube when she learns to read.  I don't want her exposed to that  
level of hate.  I don't want MYSELF exposed to it, for god's sake.
Google need to sort this out NOW, since Chad Hurley and Steve Chen  
clearly never gave a shit.

You can join the experiment by clicking on this link:
http://youtube.com/watch5?enable=1&next_url=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DjqxENMKaeCU

and you can opt out again by clicking here:
http://youtube.com/watch5?enable=0&next_url=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DjqxENMKaeCU

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Turnhere free videos

[Rupert Howe]

I agree with all of you.  $25-100 for 1-2 days work is not acceptable,  
and debases the market.  There are a lot of filler video content work  
for Q&A sites being parcelled out that pays appallingly, as I think we  
discussed before.

On the other hand, the proposition that was offered by Turnhere was  
that you shouldn't spend more than 3-4 hours in total (pre-production  
to delivery) making each 1 minute video, for businesses in walking  
distance from your house.  They have a checklist, provide all the  
documents, etc.  They don't want anything fancy - just a basic to- 
camera interview with some cutaways and a clip of the company's  
signage. So it should work out as $50-70 per hour.  They also won't  
take on newbies or students - they require professional commercial  
experience.  And have QA standards for everything submitted.

I'm not sure about the WMV thing.  They specify that you upload H264  
3000kpbs 864x486, and talk about how they provide iPod/iPhone  
compatible files to show businesses.  Odd that they have a WMV  
download for their intro webinar.

I'm not pimping them - I haven't even signed up with them.  The  
commoditization of video production concerns me because it affects the  
price and value of genuine creative filmmaking in this arena.  But I  
just wanted to put it out there for discussion and get some of the  
facts clear.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 21 Jan 2010, at 04:12, Bohuš wrote:

>
> Hiya,
>
> Just a word of background, I do TV production for a living.  Mostly
> independent stuff, but some broadcast stuff...
>
> I've been approached a lot by companies like this, especially start- 
> ups.
> They want me to find ways to reduce costs, and still deliver a large
> percentage of what I do to clients. The problem is that I do actually
> have to make a living off of making video, and that's not going to
> happen if each one takes a day or two to make and the most I can  
> hope to
> get is $25-100.
>
> It's great if you're on vacation, take a few fun videos, and then  
> get a
> check for $25... that's great.  The problem is when I'm asked to  
> create
> videos with the same level of production that I usually charge many  
> time
> more for. You're right... there are a lot of start-ups out there who
> think that the best business model is to create a venue for other  
> people
> to do all the work, and then they make their cash off the backs of  
> others.
>
> Ebay is a great example of that. They've created this quasi-community
> (less and less these days) and behave as if they were a store like
> Amazon (with special quasi-promotions, advertising, etc.), but they
> don't actually stock anything or even lick a postage stamp.  They've
> made their fortune by creating this virtual market. That's fair since
> everyone is making a little something, but what do I get out of  
> making a
> video review for $25-50?  It's fine if you're having fun, but how to
> move to the next level?
>
> What affects me now is that many clients who approach me now think  
> that
> this is the status quo for video production. I love the FLIP camera (I
> have several of them, after all...), but its ease has made my clients
> think that all video is just that easy. it's funny how shocked people
> are when they call me for a gig, and I don't jump at the chance to  
> bring
> thousands of dollars worth of gear to their $200 shoot.
>
> Oh well, these topics have been covered before here so I'll quiet  
> down.
> I love the video revolution, and I love that more people are using  
> video
> to communicate than ever, but I don't love opportunistic companies who
> devalue the industries that they try to exploit.
>
>
>>> TurnHere.com, who are an agency who match up filmmakers with small
>>> businesses, have a new promo going for US & Canadian filmmakers.
>>> You can offer free 1 minute videos to small businesses, and Turnhere
>>> will pay you $200 to make them.
>>> It's a very small amount of money, and is undercutting other people
>>> who are trying to do the same thing on an individual basis.
>>> But the requirements are much lower than your average bespoke video
>>> job. It's pretty much video by numbers. Turn up for an hour, shoot
>>> an interview with the proprietor, shoot some B roll, cut a 1 minute
>>> film, get paid $200.
>>>
>>
>> I looked into their business model. I'd want to here from video
>> producers who did a lot of work for them. Seems more like
>> http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/ff_demandmedia.
>>
>> Ironically, Turnhere's orientation video is a downloading WMV:
>> http://producers.turnhere.com/orientation-webinar-video.html
>> Guess some there doesn't know how to do simple transcoding?
>>
>> Sorry to be a scrooge, but I hate companies that just want to profit
>> from other people's work. Like an Amway scheme.
>>
>> Jay
>>
>> --
>> http://ryanishungry.com
>> http://momentshowing.net
>> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
>> 917 371 6790
>>
>>
>> 

[videoblogging] Turnhere free videos

[Rupert Howe]

So much to catch up on here.  Before I do, I thought I'd let you know  
about this:

TurnHere.com, who are an agency who match up filmmakers with small  
businesses, have a new promo going for US & Canadian filmmakers.

You can offer free 1 minute videos to small businesses, and Turnhere  
will pay you $200 to make them.

It's a very small amount of money, and is undercutting other people  
who are trying to do the same thing on an individual basis.

But the requirements are much lower than your average bespoke video  
job.  It's pretty much video by numbers.  Turn up for an hour, shoot  
an interview with the proprietor, shoot some B roll, cut a 1 minute  
film, get paid $200.

I also know a local business who is selling 3 minute films to local  
businesses for £1000-£1500 ($1700-2300)

Anyway, there it is

Rupert

Re: [videoblogging] Best Video Sitemap Tool

[Rupert Howe]

If you have Dreamweaver, there's an HTML sitemap generator, which can  
make a sitemap for both pages and files at:
http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/exchange/index.cfm?event=extensionDetail&loc=en_us&extid=1289018&PID=2874929

There's also a good Google-spec XML sitemap generator for Dreamweaver.

And there's a Google XML sitemap generator plugin for Wordpress.  I  
bet there's an HTML sitemap generator plugin too.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 16 Jan 2010, at 14:25, Julian Seery Gude wrote:

> Hi Gang,
>
> I need to start producing larger quantities of video sitemaps for  
> clients and want a tool or process that will make the process quick  
> and easy. Do you have any recommendations?
>
> Thanks so much!
>
> p.s. Anyone drooling over the new full HD 60fps Sanyo Xacti VPS-CS1  
> for $299? I am. I'm thinking it is my next camera but I'm terribly  
> sad they didn't put an external mic on it. Instead we have "Sound  
> zoom". Bollocks.
>
> http://sanyo.com/xacti/english/products/vpc_cs1/index.html
>
> /julian
>
> ---
> Julian Seery Gude
> jul...@exceler8.com
> {561} 584-9088 or {skype} exceler8
> LOCALNa8ion.com and exceler8.com
> On the web: http://www.google.com/profiles/JulianSeeryGude
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] new to the group - question about filming

[Rupert Howe]

sorry, i meant i *would* try to avoid using the location...

On 15 Jan 2010, at 21:05, Rupert Howe wrote:

> I wouldn't try to avoid using the location if it's dark and ugly.   
> The combo of fluorescent ceiling lights and your studio lights may  
> not be very useful for a dark room full of people trying to do a  
> workshop (where your lighting needs are secondary).  Sounds quite  
> stressful and ultimately probably quite unattractive and unusable.   
> If it's a 1-2 minute film, you're probably not going to get a lot of  
> meaningful content from the workshop anyway, and these kind of  
> things always look a bit odd.
>
> So think around it: how can you explain the workshops without  
> showing them?  Can you get the guy to talk about what he does in  
> little snippets, and ask him to get former participants to give  
> testimonials to camera which you can intercut.  If you really need  
> to shoot him doing his thing, cheat and film just him speaking in a  
> nicer brighter location.  Get them outside where possible.  Think  
> about rigging up a white background (sheet or paper) to do his  
> presentation against.
>
> As far as what to film, personally I would get fairly close up to  
> faces - shooting zoomed in (on a long lens) can give a nice effect,  
> but don't include the actual zooming process in your edit, as zooms  
> make cheap videos look cheaper.
>
> Other details might be good for cutaways if you really need to show  
> a long piece from start to finish - but you're probably much better  
> just sticking to quick cuts.  To many cutaways, filler shots and  
> random details can be distracting and unhelpful.  Simplicity is  
> powerful!
>
> There are a lot of great examples of this kind of thing at 
> http://turnhere.com 
>  - and if you sign up with Turn Here, you might get some work out of  
> it!
>
> The single most important thing to remember is to get good sound -  
> do not use your camera mic.  Particularly if you have to film the  
> workshop.  Bad, wild camera mic sound makes all video - however well  
> shot - look cheap and bad.   Get him to wear a lapel mic with a long  
> cable - or, if it's not possible in the venue to film him with a mic  
> attached to your camera, use a separate digital recorder and then  
> sync up sound and picture in the edit.
>
> Good luck!
>
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
>
>
> On 15 Jan 2010, at 18:24, loretabirkus wrote:
>
>> Hello videobloggers,
>>
>> I've been reading your posts and I feel so far behind in my  
>> knowledge :). But I hope I will catch up.
>>
>> I just recently started to do small videoblogs for small business  
>> owners. I'm just stepping in to see if I really like doing it. I've  
>> been filming and editing my family videos for a number of years  
>> now, but I never did anything for other people up until a month  
>> ago. I thought to give it a try and see if this could be something  
>> I can do for a living.
>>
>> So..I have several questions, if you don't mind answering.
>>
>> 1. I was asked to film a short 1-2 min clip for one small company.  
>> The president does workshops for his clients and I'd like to get  
>> some shots of that. However, I checked out the room where he's  
>> doing the workshops and it's pretty dark, ceiling florescent  
>> lighting, dark sand color walls and kind or cramped. I figured out  
>> the angle from which I will film, but I'm afraid there won't be  
>> enough lighting. I do have lights that I use for studio type  
>> picture taking (2 of them) and I will bring those, but in order to  
>> get use of them, they'd have to be upclose to people I guess.  
>> However, then the lamps would be seen in the picture.
>> How do you usually resolve the issue of lighting in small, having  
>> no windows rooms? I was thinking about increasing the exposure as  
>> well if I see that there's still not enough lighting with my both  
>> lamps that I have. But any other ideas would be helpful.
>>
>> 2. How do you film the details in such settings? Meaning, do you  
>> have to zoom into the leader of the workshop (in this case), to  
>> zoom into hands of people, their faces to capture their mood and  
>> experience at this workshop? I want to get as much footage as  
>> possible. I may not necessarily need to use it, I just want to be  
>> covered and not worry about it during the editing process. I have  
>> only one camera.
>>
>> 3. And lastly, is there any way to increase the light while  
>> editing? I'm using Sony Vegas Plati

Re: [videoblogging] new to the group - question about filming

[Rupert Howe]

I wouldn't try to avoid using the location if it's dark and ugly.  The  
combo of fluorescent ceiling lights and your studio lights may not be  
very useful for a dark room full of people trying to do a workshop  
(where your lighting needs are secondary).  Sounds quite stressful and  
ultimately probably quite unattractive and unusable.  If it's a 1-2  
minute film, you're probably not going to get a lot of meaningful  
content from the workshop anyway, and these kind of things always look  
a bit odd.

So think around it: how can you explain the workshops without showing  
them?  Can you get the guy to talk about what he does in little  
snippets, and ask him to get former participants to give testimonials  
to camera which you can intercut.  If you really need to shoot him  
doing his thing, cheat and film just him speaking in a nicer brighter  
location.  Get them outside where possible.  Think about rigging up a  
white background (sheet or paper) to do his presentation against.

As far as what to film, personally I would get fairly close up to  
faces - shooting zoomed in (on a long lens) can give a nice effect,  
but don't include the actual zooming process in your edit, as zooms  
make cheap videos look cheaper.

Other details might be good for cutaways if you really need to show a  
long piece from start to finish - but you're probably much better just  
sticking to quick cuts.  To many cutaways, filler shots and random  
details can be distracting and unhelpful.  Simplicity is powerful!

There are a lot of great examples of this kind of thing at http://turnhere.com 
  - and if you sign up with Turn Here, you might get some work out of  
it!

The single most important thing to remember is to get good sound - do  
not use your camera mic.  Particularly if you have to film the  
workshop.  Bad, wild camera mic sound makes all video - however well  
shot - look cheap and bad.   Get him to wear a lapel mic with a long  
cable - or, if it's not possible in the venue to film him with a mic  
attached to your camera, use a separate digital recorder and then sync  
up sound and picture in the edit.

Good luck!

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 15 Jan 2010, at 18:24, loretabirkus wrote:

> Hello videobloggers,
>
> I've been reading your posts and I feel so far behind in my  
> knowledge :). But I hope I will catch up.
>
> I just recently started to do small videoblogs for small business  
> owners. I'm just stepping in to see if I really like doing it. I've  
> been filming and editing my family videos for a number of years now,  
> but I never did anything for other people up until a month ago. I  
> thought to give it a try and see if this could be something I can do  
> for a living.
>
> So..I have several questions, if you don't mind answering.
>
> 1. I was asked to film a short 1-2 min clip for one small company.  
> The president does workshops for his clients and I'd like to get  
> some shots of that. However, I checked out the room where he's doing  
> the workshops and it's pretty dark, ceiling florescent lighting,  
> dark sand color walls and kind or cramped. I figured out the angle  
> from which I will film, but I'm afraid there won't be enough  
> lighting. I do have lights that I use for studio type picture taking  
> (2 of them) and I will bring those, but in order to get use of them,  
> they'd have to be upclose to people I guess. However, then the lamps  
> would be seen in the picture.
> How do you usually resolve the issue of lighting in small, having no  
> windows rooms? I was thinking about increasing the exposure as well  
> if I see that there's still not enough lighting with my both lamps  
> that I have. But any other ideas would be helpful.
>
> 2. How do you film the details in such settings? Meaning, do you  
> have to zoom into the leader of the workshop (in this case), to zoom  
> into hands of people, their faces to capture their mood and  
> experience at this workshop? I want to get as much footage as  
> possible. I may not necessarily need to use it, I just want to be  
> covered and not worry about it during the editing process. I have  
> only one camera.
>
> 3. And lastly, is there any way to increase the light while editing?  
> I'm using Sony Vegas Platinum 8 editing program. I haven't looked if  
> it has this feature. I thought I'd ask here first to get some input  
> and advice. I have one clip for another client that's a bit too  
> dark, in my opinion, and it's too late to get it re-filmed, so I was  
> wondering if there's any way that I can fix the light during editing.
>
> Thanks so much for reading this long email. I feel like an amateur  
> among you all professionals :)
>
> I'm sure I'll learn a lot here.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Have a great weekend.
>
> Cheers!
> Loreta
>
> p.s. Steve, I'll look for your book on Amazon! How amazing to get  
> published! Congrats!
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



--

Re: [videoblogging] My book was released on Amazon.com today

[Rupert Howe]

Congratulations!

And it's also available on Amazon.co.uk:
http://bit.ly/6PK1z8

More people than ever are starting out now.

Good luck with it :)

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 13 Jan 2010, at 01:01, Steve Garfield wrote:

> Hi,
> Just wanted to let you know that my book, Get Seen, was released on  
> Amazon.com today.
>
> My first post to this group was on June 6th, 2004.
>
> The first message in this group was June 1, 2004.
>
> Mine was the 6th message.
>
> It's been a wild ride from 2004 to 2010.
>
> I remember the first Vloggercon in NYC in 2005 and the second in SF  
> in 2006.
>
> My book is a nice how to guide for people starting out in online  
> video. For some of us who have been putting video on blogs wince  
> 2004, it's seems so easy now.
>
> When we started there was no YouTube, we were worried that our  
> videos would get popular, because that would cost us money.
>
> Now we've got a myriad of free hosting solutions for have lots of  
> great features.
>
> But there still are and will always be people starting out.
>
> That's where my book comes in. In the book I talk about choosing a  
> camera, getting good sound and lighting, and how to conduct  
> interviews. Also, how to edit and post, and how to go live.
>
> I've interviewed a number of Yahoo! videoblogging group members.
>
> I made a post today called, Where To Buy Get Seen. It's a very  
> simple post showing where people can order the book.
>
> It's at:
> http://bit.ly/buy-getseen
>
> In addition to that the book has a website, http://stevegarfield.com/getseen
>
> Over there I'm posting video interviews that I made for the book and  
> there are discussion forums for people who read the book who might  
> have some questions.
>
> So that's it. Just wanted to drop by and give you guys an update.
>
> Thanks for your support.
>
> --Steve
> http://stevegarfield.com
>
> Author:
> Get Seen: Online Video Secrets
> http://stevegarfield.com/getseen
>
> Founder:
> Boston Media Makers
> http://bostonmediamakers.com
>
> Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/stevegarfield
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?

[Rupert Howe]

Sorry, I edited out the line from mine where I said that I thought  
"the masses" still don't really want a phone that does video.   Most  
people I know don't want a complicated phone.  They make do stills  
from their phone because it's convenient, but view video differently -  
they want good quality, and they don't trust phone video for that  
(quite rightly, so far).

And a Nokia phone that costs many hundreds of pounds/dollars isn't  
attractive to them.  iPhone obviously attracts some people - but those  
people generally still want a good video camera as well that shoots HD.

For years, I've been trying to persuade people to use the video  
function on their stills cameras instead of buying a separate  
camcorder - but they still go out and spend a couple of hundred on a  
crappy quality Sony or Panasonic.

Now that HD is all the rage, they're more likely to buy separate  
devices.  That's why I say, a good quality small flat two-in-one  
camera and camcorder is attractive.

I'm sure in time there'll be expensive smartphones that shoot HD, but  
my guess is that "the masses" will still want a separate HD video and  
photo device as well.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 12 Jan 2010, at 06:37, David Jones wrote:

> I think you missed my point on that one a tad. "the masses" do not
> want to carry a second device at all, be it a still camera, video
> camera, or MP3 player/iPod, everything is and will ultimately converge
> to the mobile phone.
>
> But yes, I agree, your points are valid.
>
> Dave.
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Rupert Howe   
> wrote:
> > True.  But that's the very reason I see more and more people with
> > Flips and Kodaks.  They like the idea of this phone-like flat object
> > to slip in the pocket, that does both photos and HD video.
> >
> > They don't want separate chunky video camera and stills camera, if
> > they can have both in one.
> >
> > Up til now, people have assumed all-in-one devices are sub- 
> standard -
> > eg that the video on a Canon pocket stills camera can't be any  
> good -
> > when actually, it's probably brighter and clearer than their $400
> > video camera.
> >
> > Hard for most people to choose between Flip and Kodak, though.  The
> > extra features like mic in don't mean much to them.
> >
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> >
> > On 12 Jan 2010, at 03:19, David Jones wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Joly MacFie 
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > But this is my point, the flipHD fits in the pocket, costs  
> $150, and
> >> > all the editing one might need is built in to the software -  
> hey it
> >> > even has "magic movie" to make your edit decisions! It's instant
> >> > videoblogging for the masses!
> >>
> >> "the masses" don't want to carry around yet another device!
> >>
> >> Dave.
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of internet TV & videoblogging

[Rupert Howe]

It recently occurred to me that the advent of Touch Screen technology  
is the reason Apple rebuilt iMovie a couple of years ago.  The new  
format is perfect for touch screen editing.  If it works, expect more  
NLEs to experiment with this stuff in the next few years, especially  
if iMacs start to go Touch Screen.

I think 2010 is the year of internet and TV convergence - lots of new  
set top boxes and many TVs sold will be internet-capable.  I think, in  
terms of usefulness, this will be much more important than the 3D TV  
hype we're hearing at the moment.  The tablet will play its part in  
this, making video more portable & watchable.

And I think the one original format for internet TV is the  
videoblogging style.  Expect to see a lot of nicely produced shows of  
bubbly people talking to camera about any number of subjects.

If you follow what's hot week-to-week on YouTube, there are music  
videos, trailers, fails, sport, tv clips and amazing feats.  All of  
which are just recorded from TV or produced for MSM.

The only original stuff that regularly makes it to the top is  
personality videoblogging.  Ze Frank style.  Fast cuts, high energy.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 11 Jan 2010, at 18:34, Jay dedman wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 11:42 AM, elbowsofdeath  
>  wrote:
> > Belated new years greetings to all, Ive not been keeping up with  
> the list much in the last year or so but am back again for now...
>
> good to see yu again Steve. We all go through little phases with the
> group. Important to go out and do research then come back and discuss.
>
> > So, is this going to be the year that the tablet form factor  
> finally takes off? And if so, will it have many implications for  
> vlogging?
> > Assuming that Apple are going to announce a tablet/slate/call it  
> what you will near the end of the month, and knowing that other  
> companies have been showing off tablets or assocaited technology  
> recently (eg Microsoft, HP, nvidia), I guess there are 3 areas where  
> this could have implications for vlogging:
> > Mobile editing - perhaps the larger screen, more power &  
> multitouch will refresh the mobile editing experience in a good way?
> > New viewing device/habits/resolution - Assume device will be at  
> least 720p res (eg 1280x800), perhaps even full HD. Smaller videos  
> will probably still look quite nice but maybe this stuff will  
> encourage more HD content? Not sure if people watching on tablets  
> will increase demand for web video or cange the potential audience &  
> their habits much?
> > Beginnings of a new sleeker web, 3D & multitouch or at least flash- 
> free 2d slickness?
> > Ive been wanting to develop web stuff for a suitable tablet for  
> years now, although I must confess that since youtube, facebook &  
> twitter came to dominate Ive become very unclear about what is next  
> for the web and what services people might actually need.
>
> As recent history has shown, I think it'll be Apple that will set the
> tone for videoon the tablet. I'd love a touch screen to use with FCP.
> Video editing would become a little more "tactile". But as much as I
> love Final Cut Pro, Apple has emphasized the viewing and consumption
> of media vs the actual creation. It'll be interesting to see if the
> Tablet focuses on buying movies/books from iTunes to consume...or
> helps you create better.
>
> overall though, it's a pretty exciting time mainly because of the web
> has gotten faster...and it's much easier to move video around. Plus
> people are now used to watching video online. Big changes from 5 years
> ago.
>
> Jay
>
> --
> http://ryanishungry.com
> http://momentshowing.net
> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> 917 371 6790
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Mystery

[Rupert Howe]

Chrome supports both h264 and ogg theora for the video tag.

I think the browser upgrade thing is key to takeup of this.  Too many  
people still have older version browsers.  But in the meantime,  
hopefully it'll get used by more & more people doing cool interactive  
experiments.  I guess the other thing that will have an impact is what  
kind of browsers and interfaces are built into internet TV sets and  
set-top-boxes.

On 11 Jan 2010, at 20:42, elbowsofdeath wrote:

> It seems to be using html5 video tag and including links to  
> both .mp4 and ogg versions of videos on archive.org. So if I look at  
> it using safari, I get the mp4 version, I assume I would get the ogg  
> if I used a recent firefox, and for other browsers it may fallback  
> to flash.
>
> Im sure we would have had a lot more techie talk about this, and  
> seen a lot more of it in use, if this era were not dominated by  
> video hosting services that have added lots of other stuff to their  
> flash-based players.
>
> Maybe we will still see more of it once the video tag support in  
> browsers is more mature, and certainly there may be some interest  
> from people who like to DIY and would like their page to serve up  
> video in the way best suited to the viewers browser or device. Its  
> an extension of the 'serve a h264 in a flash player for most  
> browsers but have code on the page so that iphone users can get the  
> same h264 video but without the flash player' concept. Easy to build  
> on that to also serve h264 without flash for safari, easy to serve  
> ogg for firefox, just a shame that entails having to have your  
> videos in another format as well, something that will put some off.
>
> Does anyone know what Google Chrome browsers appraoch to the video  
> tag is, does it support it and if so which codecs?
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman   
> wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know who made this site?
> > http://alpha.publicvideos.org
> >
> > Its very cool...seems to use Ogg format.
> >
> > Jay
> >
> > --
> > http://ryanishungry.com
> > http://momentshowing.net
> > http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> > 917 371 6790
> >
>
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?

[Rupert Howe]

True.  But that's the very reason I see more and more people with  
Flips and Kodaks.  They like the idea of this phone-like flat object  
to slip in the pocket, that does both photos and HD video.

They don't want separate chunky video camera and stills camera, if  
they can have both in one.

Up til now, people have assumed all-in-one devices are sub-standard -  
eg that the video on a Canon pocket stills camera can't be any good -  
when actually, it's probably brighter and clearer than their $400  
video camera.

Hard for most people to choose between Flip and Kodak, though.  The  
extra features like mic in don't mean much to them.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 12 Jan 2010, at 03:19, David Jones wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Joly MacFie   
> wrote:
> >
> > But this is my point, the flipHD fits in the pocket, costs $150, and
> > all the editing one might need is built in to the software - hey it
> > even has "magic movie" to make your edit decisions! It's instant
> > videoblogging for the masses!
>
> "the masses" don't want to carry around yet another device!
>
> Dave.
>
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/