Andrew, Ed, Barry, ENTS,
I use music and make funny comments, or sad ones, or make them short, give them a loose narrative, etc. ?People may not take the material seriously because I 'package' it in a deceptively superficial, silly, or emotional way. Most of my videos are on birds at the moment, so I don't post them. We'll see if it gets me any viewers... I've got an 8 minute chef d'oeuvre of sandpipers I might publish....I love it. And if the birds fail to inspire, the music will. (In operas, I thought sets, costumes and make-up and hair were not much less important than the music itself. I figured "at least I'll look good if I crack on that note".)? Does this have anything to do with the discussion at hand? I hope so... Jenny -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Joslin <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wed, Aug 26, 2009 12:14 pm Subject: [ENTS] Re: Web Video Hello Ed and ENTS, I think you misunderstood my comments, I'm not saying that web videos should be more like professional/polished video but that the public has been conditioned by watching professionally produced film/video to expect tight editing and highly focused content. I completely agree with your analysis of the state of popular documentary film and video. Barry had commented that he wasn't getting much response to his video postings, I sympathize and was offering some explanation, ie: people aren't used to watching real-time unedited video and it's difficult to persuade anyone to take 9-10 minutes out of their day to watch anyone's video no matter how interesting or compelling it may be. Some judicious editing can keep the feel of the real-time walk through the woods and keep the length of the video down. Something to think about anyway. I've been shooting video for 3 months now, I'm in the middle of my learning curve, I've posted everything here: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=mossTreeClimber&view=videos My most popular (most viewed) videos are usually purely technical content related to tree climbing technique. My personal favorites get very few views, for instance this meditation on a small woodland brook: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ1V0hU0fXc Or this study of a male Pumpkinseed Sunfish on it's nest: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8m6hdMIRPI Best watched in HD if you have the bandwidth. Looking forward to seeing more video from Barry and the rest of the ENTS! -AJ Edward Frank wrote: > Andrew, > > Do you have videos online? I would disagree about comparison between > web videos and the professional videos on television. The main point > I think is the poor quality of the content of the documentaries as > shown on television. The images are beautiful and fit together > perfectly, but for most of them they have been polished until the life > is sucked out of them. Most of them are visual equivalents of musak - > elevator music for your eyes. The content has been dumbed down till > it tells you nothing. There is more content in a second grade text > book than most videos. There also is the question of integrity of the > documentary programs shown on television. In certain famous > historical documentaries, photos of different battles and event were > mixed together in order to improve the story flow- accuracy be > damned. The stories of the cute baby foxes out on a day of > exploration are typically mixtures of shots taken over the course of > several weeks and edited to some editor's cutesy story line. I will > not get into a further rant on the current poor state of documentary > on television and film, but only say that well edited and polished > video does not a great documentary make. > > I am not arguing that web videos are great. Most of them are not. > There is a saying that 90% of everything is crap. (The percentage may > be higher for web videos.) Nor am I suggesting that the lack of or > poor editing in the videos make them quaint or endearing. Many could > use some editing for content. What makes them interesting is the > immediacy of their content. They are interesting to watch in spite of > their limitations. > > I was posting video clips in Real Media format since the > mid 90's YouTube.was created in 2005 and marked the true beginning of > the web video explosion. It is a much more democratic medium in which > everyone can participate. It is egalitarian rather than elitist. > Forums like YouTube are changing our perceptions of how documentaties > should be created. Many of the accepted conventions in movie making > and video making were not originally designed out of a sense of > artistic integrity, but as a reflection of the limitations of the > equipment used in the filming. People posting on the web are ignoring > these conventions for better or worse. These experiments are seeping > into the broader world of television and movies. There was a TV movie > set in the last major earthquake in California showing some of the > heroics of average people. What jumped out in this movie was that > there was nota sound track. There have been sound tracks for movies > since before there were sound in the movie. This was a direct result > of news cast video styles and home movie styles. You look on the > news, often incorporated into the broadcasts are raw footage shot by > people using their home video cameras, cameras, or cell phones. > Correspondents are being interviewed overseas during wars via cell > phones. Home videos of tornados and disasters are a mainstay on the > Weather Channel. There are still limitations in this medium in > streaming over the web and with the mechanics of capturing motion and > sound with the equipment you have, but with the ability to shoot video > clips available in an $8 digital camera the trend will continue to grow > > It is this immediacy of the medium, the grittiness of the medium, the > first person perspectives that make web videos interesting to watch. > Could they be better? Sure, but they are interesting to watch in > spite of their limitations. The web is the place to see the next phase > of television documentaries evolve. As I said for better or worse. > > If we are to make an impact as individuals, or as a group in the > future we need to be part of the medium as it evolves. We need to > make these web videos and experiment with the medium. We need to > embrace the phenomenon. Some things work out, some do not, some > techniques now considered to be unacceptable will become the new > standard in the future. So for everyone out there shooting and > posting web video, keep shooting, and keep posting. > > Ed > > > /PS: Don't be disappointed that people don't comment, it's difficult to > get anyone to take 8 minutes out of their day to sit and watch a video, > no matter what the content. For my longer videos (9+ minutes) I expect > only a small number of people to watch them all the way through, > remember that today's viewers are used to professionally edited > video/movies with tight segments of concentrated information. Maybe > consider doing some editing to get the length down a little, if you can > have more focused "segments" you might have greater success getting > people to dig into your video, keep up the good work! > -AJ > / > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Eastern Native Tree Society http://www.nativetreesociety.org Send email to [email protected] Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/entstrees?hl=en To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
