I am really looking forward to this Ian.
I have remixed "real" data... ie music and video, all my life. Having
some from the BBC will be absolutely wonderful.
Best wishes
RichE
P.S. Not really in the same world as the BBC - yet Digidesign have
over the last couple of years moved to the following improvements....
it is now possible to share files "internally" with other users using
Digidelivery.... and recently they have changed the system so that
multiple Protools systems can be used in sync. This means that work
can be shared very easily now, whilst still being "governed" by the
software. I know that this isn't exactly "free" yet worth noting when
one thinks of projects done using Avid and Protools. Hence it is
becoming very easy to exchange data which includes a clear working
method.
R
On 20 Jan 2009, at 17:21, Ian Forrester wrote:
Wow thanks guys.
I don't want to get into a discussion about the footage per-se
because that's not the important thing.
So to answer the points about the packaging. I didn't know Tar was
just a way to pack together files with no compression. Now tar.gz
makes sense to me :)
The reason why we would like to Tar the files together is because of
things like subtitles, artwork, cuts of music, other metadata
pieces, etc. We're not just talking a collection of video files. I
guess we're also thinking about the 5% of the audience who would
actually do a remix with the raw project files. This would be on
going rather that a one off, so we need the ability to handle
everything from low rez 3gp files to ultra high rez animations at
stupid frame rates
Delivery,
Seems BitTorrent, P2Pnext (tribler) and the internet archive are the
best solutions by a long way. I did speak to people about how we
pass footage around internally and the answer was via hard drives.
There was some thought in the past about having drop off points in
major cities where you can get all the footage in one go by bringing
your 1TB drive for example. Sneakernet, or what ever they now call it.
Licensing,
I think we'll use something like CC-BY-NC (although I totally
understand the arguments against NC, Dave) CC-BY-NC-SA is tempting
due to the nature of the content. I do wonder how we keep the
licence in tack even when the assets are broken up and reused? Maybe
we should be looking into watermarking or some adobe xmp type
system? This would also be useful for figuring out reach.
Lots to think about... But once I got the footage cleared and sorted
you guys will be first to know. We're planning to be as open as
possible about the whole experience.
Ian Forrester
This e-mail is: [] private; [x] ask first; [] bloggable
Senior Producer, BBC Backstage
Room 1044, BBC Manchester BH, Oxford Road, M60 1SJ
email: ian.forres...@bbc.co.uk
work: +44 (0)2080083965
mob: +44 (0)7711913293
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk
] On Behalf Of Jim Tonge
Sent: 19 January 2009 23:59
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: Re: [backstage] If you had a ton of content to freely
distribute
+1 BitTorrent
+1 MP4
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html
. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html
. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
