[videoblogging] Adobe Media Player - Anyone know more?
Bringing Flash video to the Desktop: http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-6176056.html?part=rsstag=2547-1_3-0- 20subj=news Adobe Media Player will let users subscribe to and play video podcasts published with RSS (Really Simple Syndication). The application also allows users to comment on and share videos. Does anyone know more about this? Sounds really interesting, but from the sounds of it, it won't be available for GA until later this year. -Frank Frank Sinton CEO, Mefeedia [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mefeedia.com - Find, Watch, and Share great videoblogs and podcasts. Our blog: http://mefeedia.com/blog
Re: [videoblogging] Adobe Media Player - Anyone know more?
Thanks, Frank. This seems to me like it will be huge, and change the landscape of video podcasting. If it is as I've read it, I can see pretty much everyone switching to podcasting mainly with flv files in the near future. Given the file sizes, hard disk space limitations and much improved quality of Flash files, that wouldn't be so bad. Wow, Flash stuff is really finally taking off. What do you think? Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 16 Apr 2007, at 07:36, Frank Sinton wrote: Bringing Flash video to the Desktop: http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-6176056.html?part=rsstag=2547-1_3-0- 20subj=news Adobe Media Player will let users subscribe to and play video podcasts published with RSS (Really Simple Syndication). The application also allows users to comment on and share videos. Does anyone know more about this? Sounds really interesting, but from the sounds of it, it won't be available for GA until later this year. -Frank Frank Sinton CEO, Mefeedia [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mefeedia.com - Find, Watch, and Share great videoblogs and podcasts. Our blog: http://mefeedia.com/blog [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: pyro.tv transcoding and rehosting your stuff
I'm not sure why these aggregators don't provide a link - the Permalink is provided in the RSS feed. Mefeedia does this everywhere there is a reference to your video. It is easy. Thanks, -Frank Frank Sinton CEO, Mefeedia [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mefeedia.com - Find, Watch, and Share great videoblogs and podcasts. Our blog: http://mefeedia.com/blog --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Ron Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We build a page for each producer's show, complete with your show name, a link to your original website, links to your RSS feed (for an audience to subscribe), and links to the original media. I think that is an interesting statement. My 'original' website links to my RSS feed, and links to my 'original' media. The only problem is that they are not respecting my 'original' media. Or my original site. Or my RSS feed (or at least Steve's which has a proper CC in the feed...). They are creating new media with my content. That's uncool. I have yet to ask them to remove our show from their listings, as I have yet to do with Magnify.net, which I consider to be the same disrespectful business model of Pyro and My Heavy. These asshats need to start playing by some respectful rules. Just because they went out and whored themselves for big VC money doesn't give them the right to slurp up our content and give us some song and dance about how they really are helping us. For crying out loud! Is it that difficult to give a link and not to re-encode content, and to drive traffic to the original site? Of course it's not. They simply have zero respect for independent content creators. And that's the real rub, isn't it? I mean is anyone here not offended by the total lack of respect that they give all of us? I'd like to see a my heavy, pyro, magnify business model that was scraping corporate media's content. Cheers, Ron Watson On the Web: http://pawsitivevybe.com http://k9disc.com http://k9disc.blip.tv On Apr 15, 2007, at 9:17 AM, Steve Watkins wrote: Aha, interesting, I hadnt noticed the permalink issue. Their publishers page still says We build a page for each producer's show, complete with your show name, a link to your original website, links to your RSS feed (for an audience to subscribe), and links to the original media. so hopefully this is just some oversight when they redesigned their site - was it working as advertised in the past? Hmm I said I wouldnt still be ranting about network2 in 6 months, but that was based on no new violations of creators rights. Still, I feel more than a little awkward being in this territory again. I had hoped that the strong networking by network2's Chris Brogan, the participation of some vloggers in that VON and other meetups, and the participation by some members of this community in the network2 competition, meant there were exceedingly strong channels of communication between creators and network2, and that therefore this sort of thing was unlikely to happen. What do people think about them now including easily cutpasteable 'permalinks' for your videos, which are permalinks to the network2 page for the show, and also their embedded player, which I havent tried yet but suspect will be another feature designed to drive traffic to their site and not to the content creators. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Garfield steve@ wrote: It matters. I just emailed them to fix it. No link back to permalink of blog entry ( it's in the feed ) http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/ No display of CC license ( it's in the feed ) http://network2.tv/episode/2832833/ --Steve On Apr 14, 2007, at 7:16 PM, Steve Watkins wrote: if sites like network2 are opt-in now, then I suppose it doesnt amtter so much if they dont show creative commons feed info? -- Steve Garfield http://SteveGarfield.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercon 2007
guys, dont get too excited till schlomo gives the go-ahead On 4/15/07, RANDY MANN [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if you plan it they will come i started to look into venues for boston, got some leads. just need some sponsors for booking deposets. On 4/15/07, Jim Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] newmediajim%40yahoo.com wrote: I'd like to second the motion made by my esteemed colleague Mr. Goldstein, the gentleman from DC. Do we have a quorom? Would Speaker of the House Andy Carvin care to weigh in on this? - Original Message From: Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] enric%40cirne.com enric%40cirne.com To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 9:59:33 PM Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Vloggercon 2007 Find a place and sponsors. ;) --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, jonny goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to throw Washington DC in the ring as a possible venue for Vloggercon 2007. So far we've had NYC (The Culture/Finance/Media capital), Bay Area (The Tech capital), why not do vloggercon in the political capital? Imagine combining Vloggercon with visits to your lawmakers, interest groups, and such and vlogging those visits? The election cycle is going to add a bunch of energy to this town too, and we can feed off and into that energy. Washington DC is all about communication. Every major interest group in the country has a presence here. Maybe it makes sense for DIY media makers to have their voice heard here too. Maybe there are some issues that we hold in common, perhaps around intellectual property, net neutrality, shield laws, broadband access? If so, a collective voice beats a solitary voice. I'm sure there are lots of great places to hold vloggercon, I just want to make a case for DC. We have an expanding community of vloggers on the ground here who I'm sure would be happy to help out in the organizing and running of the event. I certainly would love to help out. OK, that's my pitch. What do people think? --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Rupert rupert@ wrote: What's the most recent plan for this? Last I heard here (just searched) it was going to be in Boston in the Summer, and not merged with BarCampUSA. Is that right? Still on? Any definite plans? Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player
I'm really digging the new player. However, right now my latest posted video is breaking the player. It completed the Flash conversion, but perhaps there is a secondary conversion happening in the background just for the new player? I'm going to try using the new player for my most recent video (i.e. the MN Stories home page). When that video becomes yesterday's video, I'll switch to the old embed method so the correct video plays in the permalink. Yes, it would be nice to specify which video plays first for permalink purposes. Also, there are some videos I don't want popping up in the player - like the Justin.tv sex video. So I just labeled that video as explicit content and it smartly is not included in the player videos. All in all, GREAT job Blip.tv! -chuck http://mnstories.com
Re: [videoblogging] XBox360 to support mpeg4 h264
This is good news indeed. Thanks for posting it. Slowly some things are converging. Maybe one day we'll be able to choose our technology according to its real strengths and weaknesses without having to prioritize worrying about which bloody files it'll play. On 16 Apr 2007, at 01:58, Steve Watkins wrote: This news has been around a while now but I only just noticed. The Xbox site buried the announcement in a document that mostly focussed on Instant Messaging, but anyway the next update to XBox360 in early May will include: # Added H.264 video support: Up to 10 Mbps peak, Baseline, Main, and High profiles with 2 channel AAC LC. # Added MPEG-4 Part 2 video support: Up to 5 Mbps peak, Simple Profile with 2 channel AAC LC. Hoorah, all my recent waffle with Rupert about this stuff Windows Media Center is out of date, and it looks like I was wrong about how much microsoft would resist mp4 h264. They are probably also showing off because the XBox360 has plenty of power so it can handle high-spec stuff. But it uses quite a lot of electrical power so Im not too keen to promote it a the best solution, and its a tad loud. Very good picture quality in HD modes when playing HD-DVD's so I expect the mpeg4 h264 support to be equally good, I would guess its probably the same decoder thats already used if you have the HD-DVD addon for the 360, as both HD DVD and Blueray use h264. Anyway I dunno if the update will be available for UK Xboxers at the same time as the US, but when I get it I will report as to whether ipod apple tv formatted vlogs play back on it ok, Id certainly hope/expect so. Cheers Steve Elbows [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Tilzy.tv Launch!
hey! nice job! characteristically self-referrential hee On 4/11/07, jamisonmt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Videobloggers, We just launched Tilzy.tv http://www.tilzy.tv , a guide to entertainment on the web that includes editorial overviews and short preview clips from websites with amassed entertainment content. Our goal is to raise awareness of the content available online, and to push traffic to entertainment websites many of your vlogs/shows are featured. We will make every attempt to contact every listed vlog/show individually, but in case we have difficulty reaching anyone, we thought a group post might counter possible confusion. Here's a quick rundown of Tilzy.TV http://www.tilzy.tv We feature primarily editorial text and preview clips. The preview clips last no longer than 30 seconds, never go to the heart of the show or reveal its ending, and will never have ads placed directly against them. We aggregate RSS feeds, but do not display the videos on our site. The RSS feeds function as an Episode List and link back to wherever the feed points. We have a Producer's Panel http://www.tilzy.tv/producers/login.asp that allows content producers to update the media associated with a site's listing (i.e. you can submit your own preview clips, images, notes, etc.). If you're listed on Tilzy.TV and have difficulty logging into this section or have not received account access via email, please feel free to contact one of us directly. We've built our application with the interests of rights-holders in mind, taking special note of Video Vertigo's and Mide Hudack's Aggregation Best Practices http://videovertigo.org/information/aggregation/ . That said, should you hold issue with the way we've presented your work, please let us know. We hope you like Tilzy.TV. We're pumped to be a part of this community. Joshua Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joshua%40tilzy.tv Jamison Tilsner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jamison%40tilzy.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Lifecasting
i dont understand, do i have to sign up to watch ustream? On 4/14/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now Scoble: http://www.ustream.tv/watch/channel/n6m2nBTlCbmJHPL0,I51JQ -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Tilzy.tv Launch!
Yes, I was impressed with the depth of the reviews. Like, did somebody really watch my entire archives? Poor thing. :-) --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was extremely pleased to see a guide that pays more than just lipservice to the idea that it really is a guide, a site that takes time to write reviews about the material.
[videoblogging] Scoble on MS and Adobe news
Blog post from Scoble about Adobe and Microsoft announcements at NAB. Comments are worth reading too. http://scobleizer.com/2007/04/15/microsoft-smacks-down-new-media- player-too/ or http://tinyurl.com/ynteho Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Lifecasting
Maybe it depends on whether Guest logins are enabled, but I watched Chris Pirillo the other night just by going to his live stream. There were about 50 people watching as guests. If you want to participate, you can put your name in the guest box. Maybe, if you had trouble, it was just that Scoble hadn't turned on the Guest thing. On 16 Apr 2007, at 09:27, Irina wrote: i dont understand, do i have to sign up to watch ustream? On 4/14/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now Scoble: http://www.ustream.tv/watch/channel/n6m2nBTlCbmJHPL0,I51JQ -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Lifecasting
maybe it was because it was so boring, that my exciting computer refused to play it On 4/16/07, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe it depends on whether Guest logins are enabled, but I watched Chris Pirillo the other night just by going to his live stream. There were about 50 people watching as guests. If you want to participate, you can put your name in the guest box. Maybe, if you had trouble, it was just that Scoble hadn't turned on the Guest thing. On 16 Apr 2007, at 09:27, Irina wrote: i dont understand, do i have to sign up to watch ustream? On 4/14/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] enric%40cirne.com wrote: Now Scoble: http://www.ustream.tv/watch/channel/n6m2nBTlCbmJHPL0,I51JQ -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Lifecasting
Oh, dear, that made me laugh a bit too loud. On 16 Apr 2007, at 09:44, Irina wrote: maybe it was because it was so boring, that my exciting computer refused to play it On 4/16/07, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe it depends on whether Guest logins are enabled, but I watched Chris Pirillo the other night just by going to his live stream. There were about 50 people watching as guests. If you want to participate, you can put your name in the guest box. Maybe, if you had trouble, it was just that Scoble hadn't turned on the Guest thing. On 16 Apr 2007, at 09:27, Irina wrote: i dont understand, do i have to sign up to watch ustream? On 4/14/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] enric%40cirne.com wrote: Now Scoble: http://www.ustream.tv/watch/channel/n6m2nBTlCbmJHPL0,I51JQ -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Shooting in 16:9
Should I start shooting in 16:9? As we start to see the opportunity to shift our video from the desktop to the TV, is it a good idea to shoot 16:9? I've not really done this yet, as I've been posting things online, but it looks as if we're going to shift to bigger screens real soon. Any comments on this? cheers, Ron Watson On the Web: http://pawsitivevybe.com http://k9disc.com http://k9disc.blip.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Shooting in 16:9
I say go for it, if your camera allows it. Personally, i think 16:9 is a prettier window through which to view and frame the world. 4:3 is too square for me. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 16 Apr 2007, at 10:32, Ron Watson wrote: Should I start shooting in 16:9? As we start to see the opportunity to shift our video from the desktop to the TV, is it a good idea to shoot 16:9? I've not really done this yet, as I've been posting things online, but it looks as if we're going to shift to bigger screens real soon. Any comments on this? cheers, Ron Watson On the Web: http://pawsitivevybe.com http://k9disc.com http://k9disc.blip.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Shooting in 16:9
Thanks Rupert! I guess I'm in. Are there any special workflows or tips or trix that I need to keep in mind to shoot and edit in 16:9 on iMovie FCP? Verdi? ;-) So little time for video these days as our business is gobbling up chunks of time. I can't afford any new learning curves. I spent WAAAY too much time doing total refabs of our sites (I got the vPIP to work in our new Joomla site, Enric. Nothing wrong with your software...just operator error). Now if we could just get vPIP into Joomla's standard WYSIWYG editor can you say $20 per seat? Joomla has HORRIBLE video capability, and people are starting to figure that it's worth $20 to get the functionality they need. The sites turned out great. If you have a couple of spare moments, check them out: http://pawsitivevybe.com http://k9disc.com Thanks for all the info guys! It's totally worth the avalanche of email! Cheers, Ron Watson On the Web: http://pawsitivevybe.com http://k9disc.com http://k9disc.blip.tv On Apr 16, 2007, at 5:37 AM, Rupert wrote: I say go for it, if your camera allows it. Personally, i think 16:9 is a prettier window through which to view and frame the world. 4:3 is too square for me. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 16 Apr 2007, at 10:32, Ron Watson wrote: Should I start shooting in 16:9? As we start to see the opportunity to shift our video from the desktop to the TV, is it a good idea to shoot 16:9? I've not really done this yet, as I've been posting things online, but it looks as if we're going to shift to bigger screens real soon. Any comments on this? cheers, Ron Watson On the Web: http://pawsitivevybe.com http://k9disc.com http://k9disc.blip.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Shooting in 16:9
Hi all, I shoot in 16:9 with my Sony HDV and i love this format I just have a little problem I shoot in HDV ( 1920x1080) I edit on FCP I put a filter 16:9 (1/3) I convert with Quicktime I resize my video 960x360by cropping But i get a little anamorphosis A better way ?? Some examples here : http://xi-vlog.loiez.org/2007/04/reel.php http://xi-vlog.loiez.org/2007/04/_jig_.php Loiez Le 16 avr. 07 à 11:37, Rupert a écrit : I say go for it, if your camera allows it. Personally, i think 16:9 is a prettier window through which to view and frame the world. 4:3 is too square for me. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Lifecasting
hee lifecasting sucks but Homeless James Bond is amazing http://one.revver.com/watch/209771 On 4/16/07, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh, dear, that made me laugh a bit too loud. On 16 Apr 2007, at 09:44, Irina wrote: maybe it was because it was so boring, that my exciting computer refused to play it On 4/16/07, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] rupert%40fatgirlinohio.org wrote: Maybe it depends on whether Guest logins are enabled, but I watched Chris Pirillo the other night just by going to his live stream. There were about 50 people watching as guests. If you want to participate, you can put your name in the guest box. Maybe, if you had trouble, it was just that Scoble hadn't turned on the Guest thing. On 16 Apr 2007, at 09:27, Irina wrote: i dont understand, do i have to sign up to watch ustream? On 4/14/07, Enric [EMAIL PROTECTED] enric%40cirne.comenric%40cirne.com wrote: Now Scoble: http://www.ustream.tv/watch/channel/n6m2nBTlCbmJHPL0,I51JQ -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Shooting in 16:9
Loeiz, Maybe I'm being stupid and I should probably take more time to think before I post, but 1920 x 1080 is a 16:9 image, so why do you need to use a 16:9 filter on it and then resize? Surely you can just cut it and export it at half its original size 960x540? Unless your 1920x1080 has further anamorphic squeeze on it. Sorry if I've missed the point. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 16 Apr 2007, at 11:00, Loiez D. wrote: Hi all, I shoot in 16:9 with my Sony HDV and i love this format I just have a little problem I shoot in HDV ( 1920x1080) I edit on FCP I put a filter 16:9 (1/3) I convert with Quicktime I resize my video 960x360 by cropping But i get a little anamorphosis A better way ?? Some examples here : http://xi-vlog.loiez.org/2007/04/reel.php http://xi-vlog.loiez.org/2007/04/_jig_.php Loiez Le 16 avr. 07 à 11:37, Rupert a écrit : I say go for it, if your camera allows it. Personally, i think 16:9 is a prettier window through which to view and frame the world. 4:3 is too square for me. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Shooting in 16:9
You are right Rupert But i would like to create a panoramic 16:9 My problem is to erase the blacks band ( Sorry i don't know the technical word in english) Have a nice and sunny day Loiez Le 16 avr. 07 à 12:52, Rupert a écrit : Maybe I'm being stupid and I should probably take more time to think before I post, but 1920 x 1080 is a 16:9 image, so why do you need to use a 16:9 filter on it and then resize? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] A game changer?
Check this out, interesting article http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070416/tc_nm/adobe_player_dc;_ylt=AqF8l.m rZ2KqopCFainOFEjMWM0F SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Adobe Systems Inc. unveiled on Sunday video- player software that lets consumers play back video online or offline, a move that could help reshape an acrimonious debate over video-sharing. Adobe Video Player builds on the leading design software maker's Flash player, already the dominant technology used to stream video online by sites ranging from YouTube to MySpace to MSN to Yahoo Video. The video player is due to become available to consumers over the next several months, Adobe officials said. Analysts hailed the new Adobe Video player as a technology breakthrough by allowing consumers to download and carry video from the Web to computers to mobile phones, while ensuring programmers can deliver advertising and track video usage. Rival video players such as Windows Media Player from Microsoft Corp., QuickTime from Apple Inc. and RealPlayer from RealNetworks Inc. run on a range of devices but have none of the offline tracking features. Adobe has created the first way for media companies to release video content, secure in the knowledge that advertising goes with it, Forrester Research analyst James McQuivey said. Control is something that media companies absolutely get high on, he said. Fearful of piracy, media companies have been slow to release much of their TV, film and video programming onto the Web. Last month, media conglomerate Viacom Inc. filed a $1 billion lawsuit against Google Inc. and its YouTube video-sharing site for failing to thwart the piracy of MTV, South Park and other popular Viacom television shows. At root, the debate over digital piracy has been a case of digital tools outstripping the power of copyright owners to decide who watches what while also ensuring they can get paid. The Adobe Video Player could ease such tensions by giving consumers a convenient way to watch, and even, in certain instances, to edit, video content, while assuring media owners they can retain ultimate control over where the video ends up. Consumers think: I bought my media, I own it, I should get to carry it with me from device to device. Adobe's video player works the way consumers think about media by giving them the freedom to carry it with them, McQuivey said. Adobe officials said they have relied on a set of familiar, openly accessible technologies to create Adobe Video Player and will distribute the software, for free, using the same viral strategy that made Adobe's Flash and Acrobat into the most popular ways to view video or read documents, respectively. It relies on open standards for syndicating content, synchronizing multimedia and advertising tracking. Consumers disturbed that media owners can track their consumption habits have the option of blocking such tracking. And because Adobe is already a primary supplier of the prior generation of video watching and editing tools, the company may avoid the classic chicken and egg problem that delays adoption of most new Web technologies: Will consumers use the video player before media owners embrace it? Adobe Media Player offers higher-quality Flash video, full-screen playback and the ability to be disconnected from the Web -- on airplanes, for example. Viewers also can search for shows or share their ratings of shows with other viewers and automatically download new episodes of shows. Mark Randall, chief strategist for dynamic media, said Adobe is working with a wide range of media companies, and plans to announce partnership deals next month. The Adobe Video Player offers a way for established media companies to securely offer ad-supported video but also independent video producers, podcasters and home movie makers. Adobe, of San Jose, California, timed the announcement for the start of the National Association of Broadcasters show, a major industry event, now underway in Las Vegas. Will this help or hurt? Heath http://batmangeek.com
[videoblogging] LAST CALL FOR ENTRIES 2nd NoBudget VideoFilmfestival
deutsche Version unterhalb LAST CALL FOR ENTRIES / DEADLINE 1st of May 2007 http://www.filmsharing.eu/ 2nd International No Budget VideoFilmfestival Deadline 1st of May Categories: extremely short (3min) shortfilm (3 - 15min) In focus stand narrative and fictional shorts. The manner of development can be various: we like accurately planned films, spontaneously done projects, exercices and inventive products which came into being by accident. Filmmakers who are not willing to fix their creativity into a kind of commercial frame are invited to share their work with our festival audience! Originality of narration or progress are the crucial factors of evaluation. DEADLINE 1st of May 2007 http://www.filmsharing.eu/ english version above 2nd International No Budget VideoFilmfestival Deadline 1. Mai Kategorien: Ultrakurzfilm (3min) Kurzfilm (3 - 15min) Wir möchten ein internationales Forum sein für unabhängige Produktionen mit unterschiedlichster Finanzierung; was zählt, ist die inhaltliche und ästhetische Eigenständigkeit. Der Fokus richtet sich dabei auf fiktive und narrative Kurzfilme. Die Entstehungsweise kann von sorgfältig geplanten Filmen über spontan entstandene Projekte bis zu gelungenen Übungen und originellen Zufallsprodukten reichen. Filmemacher, die ihre Kreativität nicht unbedingt in einen kommerziellen Rahmen pressen wollen, sind dazu aufgefordert, unser Festivalpublikum an ihren Werken teilhaben zu lassen! Originalität der Handlung oder des Ablaufs sind ausschlaggebende Kriterien der Bewertung. Deadline 1. Mai 2007 http://www.filmsharing.eu/
Re: [videoblogging] Shooting in 16:9
Ahh, sorry. I knew I was wrong :) I get very confused with the way that Quicktime FCP cope with anamorphic images. Always end up doing trial and error and wasting lots of time. The technical term in English is letterbox, or letterboxing The thing is though that your height and width is out of whack - seems to me that your image is too short... or too wide, whichever way you look at it. So needs to be more than 340 or more than 960 in final version. You could do this by choosing different resize settings in your Quicktime export maybe... or Maybe you could stop using the 16:9 filter, avoid ever seeing a letterbox and mess around with the Distort Aspect Ratio settings in the motion tab. That way you could create a sequence with the right aspect ratio for your panoramic, import your 1920x1080 file and stretch it using the aspect ratio setting, then cut it and export it at half or a third of the size, depending on what you want. OK, I'm going to stop guessing now. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 16 Apr 2007, at 13:13, Loiez D. wrote: You are right Rupert But i would like to create a panoramic 16:9 My problem is to erase the blacks band ( Sorry i don't know the technical word in english) Have a nice and sunny day Loiez Le 16 avr. 07 à 12:52, Rupert a écrit : Maybe I'm being stupid and I should probably take more time to think before I post, but 1920 x 1080 is a 16:9 image, so why do you need to use a 16:9 filter on it and then resize? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] A game changer?
Yeah, Frank Sinton posted this earlier and I thought it would get things popping and fizzing here but it hasn't yet. As far as I can see, it'll take off quick as the all-purpose video podcasting aggregator and offline player for the masses. Just not sure why Adobe/Macromedia didn't do it before. Seems so obvious. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 16 Apr 2007, at 13:24, Heath wrote: Check this out, interesting article http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070416/tc_nm/adobe_player_dc;_ylt=AqF8l.m rZ2KqopCFainOFEjMWM0F SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Adobe Systems Inc. unveiled on Sunday video- player software that lets consumers play back video online or offline, a move that could help reshape an acrimonious debate over video-sharing. Adobe Video Player builds on the leading design software maker's Flash player, already the dominant technology used to stream video online by sites ranging from YouTube to MySpace to MSN to Yahoo Video. The video player is due to become available to consumers over the next several months, Adobe officials said. Analysts hailed the new Adobe Video player as a technology breakthrough by allowing consumers to download and carry video from the Web to computers to mobile phones, while ensuring programmers can deliver advertising and track video usage. Rival video players such as Windows Media Player from Microsoft Corp., QuickTime from Apple Inc. and RealPlayer from RealNetworks Inc. run on a range of devices but have none of the offline tracking features. Adobe has created the first way for media companies to release video content, secure in the knowledge that advertising goes with it, Forrester Research analyst James McQuivey said. Control is something that media companies absolutely get high on, he said. Fearful of piracy, media companies have been slow to release much of their TV, film and video programming onto the Web. Last month, media conglomerate Viacom Inc. filed a $1 billion lawsuit against Google Inc. and its YouTube video-sharing site for failing to thwart the piracy of MTV, South Park and other popular Viacom television shows. At root, the debate over digital piracy has been a case of digital tools outstripping the power of copyright owners to decide who watches what while also ensuring they can get paid. The Adobe Video Player could ease such tensions by giving consumers a convenient way to watch, and even, in certain instances, to edit, video content, while assuring media owners they can retain ultimate control over where the video ends up. Consumers think: I bought my media, I own it, I should get to carry it with me from device to device. Adobe's video player works the way consumers think about media by giving them the freedom to carry it with them, McQuivey said. Adobe officials said they have relied on a set of familiar, openly accessible technologies to create Adobe Video Player and will distribute the software, for free, using the same viral strategy that made Adobe's Flash and Acrobat into the most popular ways to view video or read documents, respectively. It relies on open standards for syndicating content, synchronizing multimedia and advertising tracking. Consumers disturbed that media owners can track their consumption habits have the option of blocking such tracking. And because Adobe is already a primary supplier of the prior generation of video watching and editing tools, the company may avoid the classic chicken and egg problem that delays adoption of most new Web technologies: Will consumers use the video player before media owners embrace it? Adobe Media Player offers higher-quality Flash video, full-screen playback and the ability to be disconnected from the Web -- on airplanes, for example. Viewers also can search for shows or share their ratings of shows with other viewers and automatically download new episodes of shows. Mark Randall, chief strategist for dynamic media, said Adobe is working with a wide range of media companies, and plans to announce partnership deals next month. The Adobe Video Player offers a way for established media companies to securely offer ad-supported video but also independent video producers, podcasters and home movie makers. Adobe, of San Jose, California, timed the announcement for the start of the National Association of Broadcasters show, a major industry event, now underway in Las Vegas. Will this help or hurt? Heath http://batmangeek.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] podcampNYC session
selected highlights of me talking at What's it like to do a video podcast? at podcampNYC http://ericrochow.com/?p=140
[videoblogging] Re: when posting a podcast wich format should I use? _apple?_Rating?
so does choosing one format affect your rating on the web? For popularity sake? If I choose 640 x 480 quicktime alone, is this better than choosing multiple sizes and extentions. .move, flv, tec, etc. Will my rating be better on the web using only one size and file extention. Daryl --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow, I thought this was a brilliant post, Gena. We should save cool things like this on the Wiki. http://videoblogginggroup.pbwiki.com/ Looking at it, there's not an immediately apparent space for How To stuff like this that I can see. There's resources: links to other sites, and there's links on the front page to Freevlog and Feevlog. I thought we should set up a section which can hold pages of info like this with titles like When making a podcast which format should I use (which itself links to Freevlog, but has other context opinion as well)? But I don't want to go messing with the wiki format that's been carefully laid out already, and make it all messy. Rupert On 15 Apr 2007, at 22:07, Gena wrote: Ok, Let me take a shot at this. You can have any size you want. If you want to post postage size video that is fine. The following pertains to vlogs, web video and video on the Internet. Back in the day when more folks were on dial-up you had to balance many factors such as the dimensions, file size, video resolution and quality. I pulled out one of my old video books and these were the suggested sizes in the past: Delivery/Dimension/Frames Per Second/Audio E-mail 160x120 10fps Mono 22.05kHz Web video 240x180 12fps Stereo 22.05 kHz CD-ROM 320x240 15fps Stereo 44.1kHz If you were placing video on a web site circa 1999 the above would have been fine. But technology has moved forward. In 2005 the recommended/suggested/used (pick one)dimension of video on blogs was 320x240. Video placed on blogs/vlog at 320x240 best meet those needs of the viewers and content producers. It is still used. But it isn't the only way to do this. It is now 2007. Times have changed. You still have to balance the factors however more people are on high speed connections. There is also the introduction of digital camcorders that can record in different aspect ratios or recording dimensions. For example, 640x480 and 320x240 are in the 4:3 aspect ratio or more square like video. Same shape as an Analog TV screen. The newer digital camcorders have the ability to record 16:9 or more rectangular, like the way it looks like when you view DVD movies on analog TV sets. Your Apple TV screen is in the 16:9 aspect ratio. It is a matter of choice. Your choice on what will best serve the kind of video you are delivering. I'm really simplifying here folks so if the techies want to jump in feel free. I just want to provide a conceptual understanding. Over at Freevlog there are videos that might make it clear to you what is going on. Ryanne has her favorite compression settings http://www.freevlog.org/index.php/2007/01/14/screencast-ryannes- favorite-compression-settings/ If you just want to output to the iPod format then view http://www.freevlog.org/index.php/2007/03/19/41-compress-for-the-web- imovie/ If you are on Windows check out Michael's example. Even if you are a Mac person check it out. http://www.freevlog.org/index.php/2007/03/19/4-compress-for-the-web- windows-movie-maker/ Keep asking questions, Gena http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com http://pcclibtech.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Daryl Urig daryl@ wrote: I am confused. Can someone read my setting's below in previous question osted? I am told apple tv is: 640 x 480, 30 frames per sec., and I am also told this: Yes. The standard resolution for ANY videoblog should be 320x240. Anything else and you're really making it rather difficult for those of who watch via the PC. Can someone make this clear for me? Also see question below. Thanks. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Cook patsvideoblog@ wrote: Hi everyone: On 4/14/07, Daryl Urig daryl@ wrote: With the sound track, a one minute movie 133 megs. I am using 16 bit color 44 khz 16 bit sterio. It is a 640 wide so it can be used with apple tv. Is this a little large? Yes. The standard resolution for ANY videoblog should be 320x240. Anything else and you're really making it rather difficult for those of who watch via the PC. Bottom line - Large screen resolution doesn't amount to squat. It's VIDEO QUALITY. If the QUALITY of the video is crappy, then you can make the screen resolution WALLSIZED and it'd still be crappy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but aren't the tutorials still up on MeFeedia? Hope this helps :D What quality should I use on sound track?
[videoblogging] Re: new videoblog: Karaoke DeathMatch 100 (AKA KDM100)
hahahaha I just watched the T.Whid video. I'm inspired! hahaha :D http://www.mteww.com/kdm100/ -- Bill C. BillCammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, T.Whid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Videobloggers, Some of you may know me for my work with TVTonic, but I'm also a bit of an artist and have been active with the net art scene since 1997. I work with a collaborator and we call ourselves MTAA (more info: http://mtaa.net). We're very happy to announce that our new piece, Karaoke DeathMatch 100 ( http://www.mteww.com/kdm100/) is online. It's a videoblog with 2 new videos posted everyday for the next 50 days. The videos are of my collaborator, M.River, and myself in a karaoke competition that we taped in our studio. We get more and more drunk as the piece progresses :) We encourage to visit the web site daily, vote and discuss (there's also feeds available). Hype more info below... Best, T.Whid +++ Karaoke DeathMatch 100 (AKA KDM100) New rounds daily from April 15 2007 - June 4, 2007! on the web: http://www.mteww.com/kdm100/ +++ hype: Artist collaborative M.River T.Whid Art Associates face off in the most brutal performance art smack down of the new millennium Karaoke Deathmatch 100! This alcohol-fueled blood feud features 50 rounds of sing-along fury (taped live over an 8-hour period with hardly any pee breaks). No Carpenters hit too cheesy, no heavy metal lyric too trite for these teleprompter warriors to hurl in a battle to the end. Who will emerge victorious? Only YOU can decide. description: MTAA's Karaoke DeathMatch 100 is a video blog performance that takes place over 50 days starting April 15th, 2007 and ending June 4th, 2007. Each day, a new round is posted pitting M.River T.Whid against each other in drunken karaoke competition. Visit the web site daily to view the sets of videos, vote for your favorite and discuss the artists' performances. At the end of the competition, the votes will decide who is the Karaoke DeathMatch 100 Champion. The web version of KDM100 is an official selection of Visual 07. 7º Festival De Creación Audiovisual Ciudad De Majadahonda (http://www.visual-ma.com/). The gallery version of KDM100 premiered at the Leonart '05 ( http://www.leonding.at/leonart/05/) art festival in Leonding, Austria. KDM100 was shot in May 2005 over 8 hours. + credits + video production: Bill Hallinan, Andre Sala and George Su web production: MTAA; developed using open-source software: Wordpress (http://wordpress.org), X-Poll (http://www.hotscripts.com/Detailed/41118.html ) and embedthevideo ( http://embedthevideo.com/). URLs: web site: http://www.mteww.com/kdm100/ QuickTime feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/kdm100m4v Windows Media feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/kdm100wmv also available in iTunes... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: when posting a podcast wich format should I use? _apple?_Rating?
if I chose .QuickTime what primary directories would I limit myself from? if I chose .swf what primary directories would I limit myself from? Daryl --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow, I thought this was a brilliant post, Gena. We should save cool things like this on the Wiki. http://videoblogginggroup.pbwiki.com/ Looking at it, there's not an immediately apparent space for How To stuff like this that I can see. There's resources: links to other sites, and there's links on the front page to Freevlog and Feevlog. I thought we should set up a section which can hold pages of info like this with titles like When making a podcast which format should I use (which itself links to Freevlog, but has other context opinion as well)? But I don't want to go messing with the wiki format that's been carefully laid out already, and make it all messy. Rupert On 15 Apr 2007, at 22:07, Gena wrote: Ok, Let me take a shot at this. You can have any size you want. If you want to post postage size video that is fine. The following pertains to vlogs, web video and video on the Internet. Back in the day when more folks were on dial-up you had to balance many factors such as the dimensions, file size, video resolution and quality. I pulled out one of my old video books and these were the suggested sizes in the past: Delivery/Dimension/Frames Per Second/Audio E-mail 160x120 10fps Mono 22.05kHz Web video 240x180 12fps Stereo 22.05 kHz CD-ROM 320x240 15fps Stereo 44.1kHz If you were placing video on a web site circa 1999 the above would have been fine. But technology has moved forward. In 2005 the recommended/suggested/used (pick one)dimension of video on blogs was 320x240. Video placed on blogs/vlog at 320x240 best meet those needs of the viewers and content producers. It is still used. But it isn't the only way to do this. It is now 2007. Times have changed. You still have to balance the factors however more people are on high speed connections. There is also the introduction of digital camcorders that can record in different aspect ratios or recording dimensions. For example, 640x480 and 320x240 are in the 4:3 aspect ratio or more square like video. Same shape as an Analog TV screen. The newer digital camcorders have the ability to record 16:9 or more rectangular, like the way it looks like when you view DVD movies on analog TV sets. Your Apple TV screen is in the 16:9 aspect ratio. It is a matter of choice. Your choice on what will best serve the kind of video you are delivering. I'm really simplifying here folks so if the techies want to jump in feel free. I just want to provide a conceptual understanding. Over at Freevlog there are videos that might make it clear to you what is going on. Ryanne has her favorite compression settings http://www.freevlog.org/index.php/2007/01/14/screencast-ryannes- favorite-compression-settings/ If you just want to output to the iPod format then view http://www.freevlog.org/index.php/2007/03/19/41-compress-for-the-web- imovie/ If you are on Windows check out Michael's example. Even if you are a Mac person check it out. http://www.freevlog.org/index.php/2007/03/19/4-compress-for-the-web- windows-movie-maker/ Keep asking questions, Gena http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com http://pcclibtech.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Daryl Urig daryl@ wrote: I am confused. Can someone read my setting's below in previous question osted? I am told apple tv is: 640 x 480, 30 frames per sec., and I am also told this: Yes. The standard resolution for ANY videoblog should be 320x240. Anything else and you're really making it rather difficult for those of who watch via the PC. Can someone make this clear for me? Also see question below. Thanks. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Cook patsvideoblog@ wrote: Hi everyone: On 4/14/07, Daryl Urig daryl@ wrote: With the sound track, a one minute movie 133 megs. I am using 16 bit color 44 khz 16 bit sterio. It is a 640 wide so it can be used with apple tv. Is this a little large? Yes. The standard resolution for ANY videoblog should be 320x240. Anything else and you're really making it rather difficult for those of who watch via the PC. Bottom line - Large screen resolution doesn't amount to squat. It's VIDEO QUALITY. If the QUALITY of the video is crappy, then you can make the screen resolution WALLSIZED and it'd still be crappy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but aren't the tutorials still up on MeFeedia? Hope this helps :D What quality should I use on sound track? What quality should I use on quicktime movie? How small should this file size be? thanks in advance. --- In
[videoblogging] Re: Shooting in 16:9
You could crop and zoom your video to remove the black bars. Alas, in doing so, you would lose quality. David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com http://www.taoofdavid.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Loiez D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You are right Rupert But i would like to create a panoramic 16:9 My problem is to erase the blacks band ( Sorry i don't know the technical word in english) Have a nice and sunny day Loiez Le 16 avr. 07 à 12:52, Rupert a écrit : Maybe I'm being stupid and I should probably take more time to think before I post, but 1920 x 1080 is a 16:9 image, so why do you need to use a 16:9 filter on it and then resize? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Our Apple TV Settings
My bad Steve, yeah your right its low-complexity instead of simple. Now that we have our words right again I ask the community, does anyone know of a good transcoder that handles the low-complexity h.264 MP4 conversions (640x480 ipod compatable with bitrate manipulation) on the PC? I've tried Videora, but the darn thing loses sound sync so bad that its almost worthless. I would appreciate any tips all, I really would like to be able to go 640x480 with my next episode. Rev. Chumley http://www.cultofuhf.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ahh I get you, the confusion is still about the term 'simple profile'. Simple profile is, as I said before, an mpeg4 profile, not a h264 one. Ive looked at the Apple specs, and I think you mean 'low complexity baseline profile'... * H.264 video, up to 1.5 Mbps, 640 x 480, 30 frames per sec., Low-Complexity version of the Baseline Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 kbps, 48 Khz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats * H.264 video, up to 768 kbps, 320 x 240, 30 frames per sec., Baseline Profile up to Level 1.3 with AAC-LC audio up to 160 kbps, 48 Khz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats * MPEG-4 video, up to 2.5 Mbps, 640 x 480, 30 frames per sec., Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 kbps, 48 Khz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats So yeah, for 640x480 res stuff to work on the ipod, it either needs to be either Low-Complexity baseline profile h264, or simple profile mpeg4. I know how you can do simple profile in mpeg4 in quicktime, but admit Im not sure how to activate low-complexity encoding using manual h264 settings in quicktime. I'll see if I can find out, anybody know if it can be done? Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Chumley metaflibble@ wrote: Baseline works fine in h.264 320x240 for ipods, but baseline profile in 640x480 h.264 is not ipod compatable at any bitrate. In order for it to be ipod compatable at 640x480 it has to be in the new Simple h.264 profile. I've tried every bitrate I can think of in h.264 with baseline profile but none of them will transfer if its in 640x480. Straight MP4 will work, but it looks terrible compared to h.264 and the file size is always larger.
[videoblogging] Re: Tilzy.tv Launch!
Wow, nice site guys! I read my show editorial and just sat there blinking for a second. How Rebecca knew half of that stuff about the show I have no idea. Again, great job! Rev. Chumley http://www.cultofuhf.com -- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Irina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hey! nice job! characteristically self-referrential hee On 4/11/07, jamisonmt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Videobloggers, We just launched Tilzy.tv http://www.tilzy.tv , a guide to entertainment on the web that includes editorial overviews and short preview clips from websites with amassed entertainment content. Our goal is to raise awareness of the content available online, and to push traffic to entertainment websites many of your vlogs/shows are featured. We will make every attempt to contact every listed vlog/show individually, but in case we have difficulty reaching anyone, we thought a group post might counter possible confusion. Here's a quick rundown of Tilzy.TV http://www.tilzy.tv We feature primarily editorial text and preview clips. The preview clips last no longer than 30 seconds, never go to the heart of the show or reveal its ending, and will never have ads placed directly against them. We aggregate RSS feeds, but do not display the videos on our site. The RSS feeds function as an Episode List and link back to wherever the feed points. We have a Producer's Panel http://www.tilzy.tv/producers/login.asp that allows content producers to update the media associated with a site's listing (i.e. you can submit your own preview clips, images, notes, etc.). If you're listed on Tilzy.TV and have difficulty logging into this section or have not received account access via email, please feel free to contact one of us directly. We've built our application with the interests of rights-holders in mind, taking special note of Video Vertigo's and Mide Hudack's Aggregation Best Practices http://videovertigo.org/information/aggregation/ . That said, should you hold issue with the way we've presented your work, please let us know. We hope you like Tilzy.TV. We're pumped to be a part of this community. Joshua Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joshua%40tilzy.tv Jamison Tilsner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jamison%40tilzy.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Vonnegut's Advice To Videomakers
Didn't Vonnegut get Rodney Dangerfield a bad grade on his term paper in Back To School? JCH www.jchtv.com --- Kent Nichols [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This was really advice to Short Story authors, but i think it also applies to thos of us that are striving to create short form videos. From: http://matociquala.livejournal.com/1107367.html Some writing advice by Kurt Vonnegut Jr. on the subject of short stories, from Bagombo Snuff Box: 1. Use the time of a total stranger in such a way that he or she will not feel the time was wasted. 2. Give the reader at least one character he or she can root for. 3. Every character should want something, even if it is only a glass of water. 4. Every sentence must do one of two things -- reveal character or advance the action. 5. Start as close to the end as possible. 6. Be a sadist. No matter how sweet and innocent your leading characters, make awful things happen to them -- in order that the reader may see what they are made of. 7. Write to please just one person. If you open a window and make love to the world, so to speak, your story will get pneumonia. 8. Give your readers as much information as possible as soon as possible. To heck with suspense. Readers should have such complete understanding of what is going on, where and why, that they could finish the story themselves, should cockroaches eat the last few pages. Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Cocktails and other good Craic!http://www.jchtv.com/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[videoblogging] Re: Tilzy.tv Launch!
Hi Guys Tilzy.tv is great...good work. I appreciate what you put into it, and it is helpful for those going to find things on the web. I can see you being a resource for reference. LateNiteMash has been quiet, but I am back editing some new webisodes. Ciao! Daniel McVicar www.latenitemash.com On 4/11/07, jamisonmt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Videobloggers, We just launched Tilzy.tv http://www.tilzy.tv , a guide to entertainment on the web that includes editorial overviews and short preview clips from websites with amassed entertainment content. Our goal is to raise awareness of the content available online, and to push traffic to entertainment websites many of your vlogs/shows are featured. We will make every attempt to contact every listed vlog/show individually, but in case we have difficulty reaching anyone, we thought a group post might counter possible confusion. Here's a quick rundown of Tilzy.TV http://www.tilzy.tv We feature primarily editorial text and preview clips. The preview clips last no longer than 30 seconds, never go to the heart of the show or reveal its ending, and will never have ads placed directly against them. We aggregate RSS feeds, but do not display the videos on our site. The RSS feeds function as an Episode List and link back to wherever the feed points. We have a Producer's Panel http://www.tilzy.tv/producers/login.asp that allows content producers to update the media associated with a site's listing (i.e. you can submit your own preview clips, images, notes, etc.). If you're listed on Tilzy.TV and have difficulty logging into this section or have not received account access via email, please feel free to contact one of us directly. We've built our application with the interests of rights-holders in mind, taking special note of Video Vertigo's and Mide Hudack's Aggregation Best Practices http://videovertigo.org/information/aggregation/ . That said, should you hold issue with the way we've presented your work, please let us know. We hope you like Tilzy.TV. We're pumped to be a part of this community. Joshua Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joshua%40tilzy.tv Jamison Tilsner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jamison%40tilzy.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- http://geekentertainment.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] A game changer?
Game Changer? - Yes. On 4/16/07, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Check this out, interesting article http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070416/tc_nm/adobe_player_dc;_ylt=AqF8l.m rZ2KqopCFainOFEjMWM0F SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Adobe Systems Inc. unveiled on Sunday video- player software that lets consumers play back video online or offline, a move that could help reshape an acrimonious debate over video-sharing. Adobe Video Player builds on the leading design software maker's Flash player, already the dominant technology used to stream video online by sites ranging from YouTube to MySpace to MSN to Yahoo Video. The video player is due to become available to consumers over the next several months, Adobe officials said. Analysts hailed the new Adobe Video player as a technology breakthrough by allowing consumers to download and carry video from the Web to computers to mobile phones, while ensuring programmers can deliver advertising and track video usage. Rival video players such as Windows Media Player from Microsoft Corp., QuickTime from Apple Inc. and RealPlayer from RealNetworks Inc. run on a range of devices but have none of the offline tracking features. Adobe has created the first way for media companies to release video content, secure in the knowledge that advertising goes with it, Forrester Research analyst James McQuivey said. Control is something that media companies absolutely get high on, he said. Fearful of piracy, media companies have been slow to release much of their TV, film and video programming onto the Web. Last month, media conglomerate Viacom Inc. filed a $1 billion lawsuit against Google Inc. and its YouTube video-sharing site for failing to thwart the piracy of MTV, South Park and other popular Viacom television shows. At root, the debate over digital piracy has been a case of digital tools outstripping the power of copyright owners to decide who watches what while also ensuring they can get paid. The Adobe Video Player could ease such tensions by giving consumers a convenient way to watch, and even, in certain instances, to edit, video content, while assuring media owners they can retain ultimate control over where the video ends up. Consumers think: I bought my media, I own it, I should get to carry it with me from device to device. Adobe's video player works the way consumers think about media by giving them the freedom to carry it with them, McQuivey said. Adobe officials said they have relied on a set of familiar, openly accessible technologies to create Adobe Video Player and will distribute the software, for free, using the same viral strategy that made Adobe's Flash and Acrobat into the most popular ways to view video or read documents, respectively. It relies on open standards for syndicating content, synchronizing multimedia and advertising tracking. Consumers disturbed that media owners can track their consumption habits have the option of blocking such tracking. And because Adobe is already a primary supplier of the prior generation of video watching and editing tools, the company may avoid the classic chicken and egg problem that delays adoption of most new Web technologies: Will consumers use the video player before media owners embrace it? Adobe Media Player offers higher-quality Flash video, full-screen playback and the ability to be disconnected from the Web -- on airplanes, for example. Viewers also can search for shows or share their ratings of shows with other viewers and automatically download new episodes of shows. Mark Randall, chief strategist for dynamic media, said Adobe is working with a wide range of media companies, and plans to announce partnership deals next month. The Adobe Video Player offers a way for established media companies to securely offer ad-supported video but also independent video producers, podcasters and home movie makers. Adobe, of San Jose, California, timed the announcement for the start of the National Association of Broadcasters show, a major industry event, now underway in Las Vegas. Will this help or hurt? Heath http://batmangeek.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Biting the Apple (TV)...anyone?
Just back from out of the country to find 800 yahoo emails and one from iTunes suggesting to increase my video size to 640x480. After reading emails all morning, there doesn't seem to be alot of enthusiasm for doing this. Or am I missing something. I guess I'll stick to the tried and true Freevlog specs of 320x240. Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Cocktails and other good Craic!http://www.jchtv.com/ - Ahhh...imagining that irresistible new car smell? Check outnew cars at Yahoo! Autos. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player
The blip player is an addition, not a replacement, for the reasons stated below. It's good to have permalinks and commenting for people that are going to utilize permalinks and comments. You don't want to twitter someone to a page with your blip player if you're trying to point them to a single video because the player auto-updates. As soon as you add another video to that show, the link is useless. OTOH, for people that DON'T use permalinks, the blip player's great. I just changed my front page to house four blip players, representing each one of my current shows. Each show has its own episode guide and navigation controls, AND any one of them can be played full-screen. :) This means I can send people that don't know anything about permalinks to one page, and they can browse all of my episodes right from there. The other thing that's useful about it is the auto-play, because people don't tend to surf my site. They look at the page they landed on, then they exit. With episode guides and descriptions available, as well as the video continuing to the next one when the current one finishes, I think that will increase the likelihood that more people will see multiple videos of mine instead of just one. Simply by having four players on the same screen, there's the possibility that they'll explore a show that they've never heard of or didn't come to the site to check out. The player's also good if you want to embed a dynamic version of your show in general instead of your page in particular. Instead of having to announce updates, the player gets the update as soon as it posts to blip and gets encoded to flash. -- Bill C. http://BillCammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael, For some people the blog format is really important. Cross-posting, copy paste and everything else we've built to support the blog format aren't going away. We're going to keep those features, and we're going to keep improving them. It's just that the blog format isn't right for everyone. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Verdi Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 12:09 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] New blip.tv show player Aaron Steve - you bring up some good points. I do think options for people are important and I do like the ability to look through an archive but the price is that you loose all the other benefits of a blog - permalinks, comments, context, choice of video size and formats. That player is really built on the idea that your blip.tv blog is your blog. So it only shows and links back to your blog posts on blip. Comments? They have to go on the blip blog (as long as the viewer know to click through to the blip blog to leave a comment). Plus you have to have the blip hot shows menu. That thing pulls in stuff completely out of context that you have no control over. Of course you do have control in that you certainly don't have to use the show player at all. I just think the blog part of videoblogging is important and desirable and I feel a little sad when people are so excited about dropping it. - Verdi On 4/15/07, Steve Garfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I put the new blip.tv player on my 'homepage' this morning. http://www.stevegarfield.com/ I blogged about it here: http://offonatangent.blogspot.com/2007/04/blip-video-player.html In the blog post I say, vlogs are dead. ;-) It's a joke, but also ironic since the reason for initially using blogs to post video in the first place was a technical one. There wasn't any easy way to post video to the web. Once I figured out that I could put video in a blog post, I got a very easy way to publish videos, along with the added benefits of that video being included in a blog post. But that method, over time, introduced the problems of old videos getting lost in archives, and not having an easy way to browse through videos. There are a lot of companies now bringing to the market ways to make it easy to surf videos and I'm glad that blip.tv has given me a way to allow people to browse my archives that are hosted with blip.tv. --Steve On Apr 15, 2007, at 9:45 AM, Steve Watkins wrote: Sounds quite interesting, anybody tried it yet? Some details here: http://blog.blip.tv/blog/ Cheers Steve Elbows Yahoo! Groups Links -- Steve Garfield http://SteveGarfield.com -- http://michaelverdi.com http://spinxpress.com http://freevlog.org Author of Secrets Of Videoblogging - http://tinyurl.com/me4vs [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Offering both makes a lot of sense to me. I dream of this stuff being pushed to the extreme and for it to be possible for a blog like experience to be completely available from within a flash player. Complexities quickly arise when the people providing the player are hosting your videos, but are not responsible for the rest of your blog, it leads to an understandable focus on the video hosting page rather than your blog page. This may not be considered a probem because the expectation may be that you embed their player in your site, and your site provides all the other bloggy stuff you want. But this doesnt cover scenarios where our show player may be embedded on another site or used as a widget. I see the guide button is optional, and its easy to rebrand the player so that its got your own site in the bottom right hand corner, which is a clickable link pointing to the URL of your choice. Thanks for mentioning that. I had those pointing to the blip shows, basically by default, but I've switched them now so that they point to the blogs for the shows instead of the blip pages. This helps out the permalink situation A LITTLE BIT, but it still takes the viewer to the most recent post in the blog. The only thing that seems to update with the individual video is if you click guide and then read more about this on blip.tv, which takes you to the individual video's page on blip. -- Bill C. BillCammack.com Id love to see the creative commons stuff thats been requested in the past, be rolled out into this show player in the future, whether it be through a little cc icon on the bottom bar of the player, or the inclusion of this info in the popup 'about this episode' tab. I agree about the font size, hmm this stuff starts to get a bit tricky, a big decision to break away from the player being 320x240. I see that Veoh's player is rather large now, but this makes it look quite good and leaves more room for additional info overlays to be displayed in a larger font. Some other services have really wide players with separate episode bars to one side of the video. Personally Im fascinated by the idea of a flash player for wordpress that can display the entire blog, text video etc, in the flash player. I was looking at WPF/E but I think I'll ignore that technology for now, and go buymyself a copy of flash and join the fun. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack mike@ wrote: Michael, For some people the blog format is really important. Cross-posting, copy paste and everything else we've built to support the blog format aren't going away. We're going to keep those features, and we're going to keep improving them. It's just that the blog format isn't right for everyone. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Verdi Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 12:09 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] New blip.tv show player Aaron Steve - you bring up some good points. I do think options for people are important and I do like the ability to look through an archive but the price is that you loose all the other benefits of a blog - permalinks, comments, context, choice of video size and formats. That player is really built on the idea that your blip.tv blog is your blog. So it only shows and links back to your blog posts on blip. Comments? They have to go on the blip blog (as long as the viewer know to click through to the blip blog to leave a comment). Plus you have to have the blip hot shows menu. That thing pulls in stuff completely out of context that you have no control over. Of course you do have control in that you certainly don't have to use the show player at all. I just think the blog part of videoblogging is important and desirable and I feel a little sad when people are so excited about dropping it. - Verdi On 4/15/07, Steve Garfield steve@ wrote: I put the new blip.tv player on my 'homepage' this morning. http://www.stevegarfield.com/ I blogged about it here: http://offonatangent.blogspot.com/2007/04/blip-video-player.html In the blog post I say, vlogs are dead. ;-) It's a joke, but also ironic since the reason for initially using blogs to post video in the first place was a technical one. There wasn't any easy way to post video to the web. Once I figured out that I could put video in a blog post, I got a very easy way to publish videos, along with the added benefits of that video being included in a blog post. But that method, over time, introduced the problems of old videos getting lost in archives, and not having an easy way to browse through videos. There are a lot of companies now bringing to the
[videoblogging] Re: podcampNYC session
Good points and selects from your session. :) A lot of the basics that I went through myself. You probably helped a lot of people not have to re-invent the wheel. -- Bill C. BillCammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, eric gunnar rochow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: selected highlights of me talking at What's it like to do a video podcast? at podcampNYC http://ericrochow.com/?p=140
Re: [videoblogging] Digest Number 4050
Please do it in DC! I am beggin¹ ya. Last year us East Coasters Flew that way. Its time you¹all flew this way. Zulma * Zulma Aguiar Electronic Artist Arlington, VA (Washington DC) 703-416-2262 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Www.zulmaaguiar.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player
Yes - point taken about it not being a replacement. It's also good for things like user profiles on various social networks. - Verdi On 4/16/07, Bill Cammack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Offering both makes a lot of sense to me. I dream of this stuff being pushed to the extreme and for it to be possible for a blog like experience to be completely available from within a flash player. Complexities quickly arise when the people providing the player are hosting your videos, but are not responsible for the rest of your blog, it leads to an understandable focus on the video hosting page rather than your blog page. This may not be considered a probem because the expectation may be that you embed their player in your site, and your site provides all the other bloggy stuff you want. But this doesnt cover scenarios where our show player may be embedded on another site or used as a widget. I see the guide button is optional, and its easy to rebrand the player so that its got your own site in the bottom right hand corner, which is a clickable link pointing to the URL of your choice. Thanks for mentioning that. I had those pointing to the blip shows, basically by default, but I've switched them now so that they point to the blogs for the shows instead of the blip pages. This helps out the permalink situation A LITTLE BIT, but it still takes the viewer to the most recent post in the blog. The only thing that seems to update with the individual video is if you click guide and then read more about this on blip.tv, which takes you to the individual video's page on blip. -- Bill C. BillCammack.com Id love to see the creative commons stuff thats been requested in the past, be rolled out into this show player in the future, whether it be through a little cc icon on the bottom bar of the player, or the inclusion of this info in the popup 'about this episode' tab. I agree about the font size, hmm this stuff starts to get a bit tricky, a big decision to break away from the player being 320x240. I see that Veoh's player is rather large now, but this makes it look quite good and leaves more room for additional info overlays to be displayed in a larger font. Some other services have really wide players with separate episode bars to one side of the video. Personally Im fascinated by the idea of a flash player for wordpress that can display the entire blog, text video etc, in the flash player. I was looking at WPF/E but I think I'll ignore that technology for now, and go buymyself a copy of flash and join the fun. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack mike@ wrote: Michael, For some people the blog format is really important. Cross-posting, copy paste and everything else we've built to support the blog format aren't going away. We're going to keep those features, and we're going to keep improving them. It's just that the blog format isn't right for everyone. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Verdi Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 12:09 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] New blip.tv show player Aaron Steve - you bring up some good points. I do think options for people are important and I do like the ability to look through an archive but the price is that you loose all the other benefits of a blog - permalinks, comments, context, choice of video size and formats. That player is really built on the idea that your blip.tv blog is your blog. So it only shows and links back to your blog posts on blip. Comments? They have to go on the blip blog (as long as the viewer know to click through to the blip blog to leave a comment). Plus you have to have the blip hot shows menu. That thing pulls in stuff completely out of context that you have no control over. Of course you do have control in that you certainly don't have to use the show player at all. I just think the blog part of videoblogging is important and desirable and I feel a little sad when people are so excited about dropping it. - Verdi On 4/15/07, Steve Garfield steve@ wrote: I put the new blip.tv player on my 'homepage' this morning. http://www.stevegarfield.com/ I blogged about it here: http://offonatangent.blogspot.com/2007/04/blip-video-player.html In the blog post I say, vlogs are dead. ;-) It's a joke, but also ironic since the reason for initially using blogs to post video in the first place was a technical one.
[videoblogging] Virginia Tech Shooting--citizen journalism meets CNN
CNN's I-Report let's anyone upload footage. Someone uploaded their mobile phone video to I-Report and CNN is using it in their VA Tech Shooting coverage. I-Report is powered by Blip.TV software by the way. http://tinyurl.com/33qgsw
[videoblogging] Re: Excellent write up on Bikes against Bush
Hail yes! I think I saw something about this in NYTimes recently too? Great stuff! Josh is a genius! In fact there are several Josh Geniuses here in this community. Nice! --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, bofoboho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Via Wired http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/04/kinberg_0410 clark zipzapzop.com mygermanclass.com
[videoblogging] Enforced Ads Coming to Flash Video Players
Hello, (Sorry if this is a double post.) Enforced Ads Coming to Flash Video Players http://slashdot.org/articles/07/04/16/1613204.shtml *The BBC is reporting that Adobe is releasing new player software which will allow websites that use their Flash video player (such as YouTube) to force viewers to watch ads http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6558979.stmbefore the video they selected will play. 'But the big seller for Adobe is the ability to include in Flash movies so-called digital rights management (DRM) allowing copyright holders to require the viewing of adverts, or restrict copying. Adobe has created the first way for media companies to release video content, secure in the knowledge that advertising goes with it, James McQuivey, an analyst at Forrester Research said.' This seems to have been timed to coincide with Microsoft's release of their own competitor, Silverlight, to Adobe's dominance of online video.* Followup link... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6558979.stm -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ ___ Cars, Motorcycles, Trucks, and Racing... http://tirebiterz.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: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Enforced Ads Coming to Flash Video Players
i bet with in a week some one will dl and repost something with out the ad in it On 4/16/07, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, (Sorry if this is a double post.) Enforced Ads Coming to Flash Video Players http://slashdot.org/articles/07/04/16/1613204.shtml *The BBC is reporting that Adobe is releasing new player software which will allow websites that use their Flash video player (such as YouTube) to force viewers to watch ads http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6558979.stmbefore the video they selected will play. 'But the big seller for Adobe is the ability to include in Flash movies so-called digital rights management (DRM) allowing copyright holders to require the viewing of adverts, or restrict copying. Adobe has created the first way for media companies to release video content, secure in the knowledge that advertising goes with it, James McQuivey, an analyst at Forrester Research said.' This seems to have been timed to coincide with Microsoft's release of their own competitor, Silverlight, to Adobe's dominance of online video.* Followup link... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6558979.stm -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ ___ Make Televisionhttp://maketelevision.com/ ___ Cars, Motorcycles, Trucks, and Racing... http://tirebiterz.com/ [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: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Enforced Ads Coming to Flash Video Players
Um, it's not enforced any more than it is at the moment when you watch something with a postroll or whatever. Adobe are highlighting it because they're using it as a selling point to commercial producers, making it clear that they can use adverts and DRM when they distribute their content with this product. But they also make clear that their product is good for non- commercial producers, videobloggers, etc who don't want to include adverts or DRM. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 16 Apr 2007, at 20:10, RANDY MANN wrote: i bet with in a week some one will dl and repost something with out the ad in it On 4/16/07, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, (Sorry if this is a double post.) Enforced Ads Coming to Flash Video Players http://slashdot.org/articles/07/04/16/1613204.shtml *The BBC is reporting that Adobe is releasing new player software which will allow websites that use their Flash video player (such as YouTube) to force viewers to watch ads http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6558979.stmbefore the video they selected will play. 'But the big seller for Adobe is the ability to include in Flash movies so-called digital rights management (DRM) allowing copyright holders to require the viewing of adverts, or restrict copying. Adobe has created the first way for media companies to release video content, secure in the knowledge that advertising goes with it, James McQuivey, an analyst at Forrester Research said.' This seems to have been timed to coincide with Microsoft's release of their own competitor, Silverlight, to Adobe's dominance of online video.* Followup link... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6558979.stm -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. charles @ reptile.ca supercanadian @ gmail.com developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/ __ _ Make Televisionhttp:// maketelevision.com/ __ _ Cars, Motorcycles, Trucks, and Racing... http:// tirebiterz.com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links [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: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player
Hi, Has anyone found a way to control the order of the episodes within the player? Is this something that Blip is planning on offering? -Matt http://neovids.tv --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes - point taken about it not being a replacement. It's also good for things like user profiles on various social networks. - Verdi On 4/16/07, Bill Cammack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins steve@ wrote: Offering both makes a lot of sense to me. I dream of this stuff being pushed to the extreme and for it to be possible for a blog like experience to be completely available from within a flash player. Complexities quickly arise when the people providing the player are hosting your videos, but are not responsible for the rest of your blog, it leads to an understandable focus on the video hosting page rather than your blog page. This may not be considered a probem because the expectation may be that you embed their player in your site, and your site provides all the other bloggy stuff you want. But this doesnt cover scenarios where our show player may be embedded on another site or used as a widget. I see the guide button is optional, and its easy to rebrand the player so that its got your own site in the bottom right hand corner, which is a clickable link pointing to the URL of your choice. Thanks for mentioning that. I had those pointing to the blip shows, basically by default, but I've switched them now so that they point to the blogs for the shows instead of the blip pages. This helps out the permalink situation A LITTLE BIT, but it still takes the viewer to the most recent post in the blog. The only thing that seems to update with the individual video is if you click guide and then read more about this on blip.tv, which takes you to the individual video's page on blip. -- Bill C. BillCammack.com Id love to see the creative commons stuff thats been requested in the past, be rolled out into this show player in the future, whether it be through a little cc icon on the bottom bar of the player, or the inclusion of this info in the popup 'about this episode' tab. I agree about the font size, hmm this stuff starts to get a bit tricky, a big decision to break away from the player being 320x240. I see that Veoh's player is rather large now, but this makes it look quite good and leaves more room for additional info overlays to be displayed in a larger font. Some other services have really wide players with separate episode bars to one side of the video. Personally Im fascinated by the idea of a flash player for wordpress that can display the entire blog, text video etc, in the flash player. I was looking at WPF/E but I think I'll ignore that technology for now, and go buymyself a copy of flash and join the fun. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack mike@ wrote: Michael, For some people the blog format is really important. Cross-posting, copy paste and everything else we've built to support the blog format aren't going away. We're going to keep those features, and we're going to keep improving them. It's just that the blog format isn't right for everyone. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Verdi Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 12:09 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] New blip.tv show player Aaron Steve - you bring up some good points. I do think options for people are important and I do like the ability to look through an archive but the price is that you loose all the other benefits of a blog - permalinks, comments, context, choice of video size and formats. That player is really built on the idea that your blip.tv blog is your blog. So it only shows and links back to your blog posts on blip. Comments? They have to go on the blip blog (as long as the viewer know to click through to the blip blog to leave a comment). Plus you have to have the blip hot shows menu. That thing pulls in stuff completely out of context that you have no control over. Of course you do have control in that you certainly don't have to use the show player at all. I just think the blog part of videoblogging is important and desirable and I feel a little sad when people are so excited about dropping it. - Verdi On 4/15/07, Steve Garfield steve@ wrote: I put the new blip.tv player on my 'homepage' this
[videoblogging] Make Internet TV
In case y'all don't read BoingBoing religiously like I do, Cory just posted a plug for the new Participatory Culture Foundation project called Make Internet TV. It's not earth-shattering for those of us who've been making videos for web for a while, but if you've got friends you're tired of explaining the How-To's to, this is where to send them! Basic and to the point. And for those of you wiki fans out there, they've got a wiki to make the whole thing better and more informative. I don't doubt some of you will be in there, cranking away it. :) http://makeinternettv.org/
RE: [videoblogging] NOOOOOOO!!!!
For the last thirty years I've been trying, unsuccessfully I might add, to get my cable television provider here in the States to carry Canadian television stations. One of my best friends lives in Ohio and can pick up stations across the lake from Windsor. I'm so damn jealous. _ From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Casey McKinnon Sent: Saturday, 14 April, 2007 4:30 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] NOOO In Canada, the CRTC is the equivalent to the FCC (in the US), so this is TERRIBLE NEWS: http://www.cbc. http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2007/04/13/crtc-review.html ca/technology/story/2007/04/13/crtc-review.html The CRTC are the creators of a crappy thing called CanCon (Canadian Content) which forces broadcasters to play a large percentage of Canadian Content, therefore making our television SUCK. Keep the Internet free!!! Casey --- http://galacticast. http://galacticast.com com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player
As far as I can tell, there are no parameters for order of videos, and there's no parameter for which video to start with. It seems like the function is an up-to-date player of your latest video, with the opportunity to use the FF and Rewind buttons to scroll through the videos one by one OR the option to use the guide and select an episode from the rest of the list. You can ask them in the blip user group: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/blip-users/ -- Bill C. BillCammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, mattfeldman78 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Has anyone found a way to control the order of the episodes within the player? Is this something that Blip is planning on offering? -Matt http://neovids.tv --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi michael@ wrote: Yes - point taken about it not being a replacement. It's also good for things like user profiles on various social networks. - Verdi On 4/16/07, Bill Cammack BillCammack@ wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins steve@ wrote: Offering both makes a lot of sense to me. I dream of this stuff being pushed to the extreme and for it to be possible for a blog like experience to be completely available from within a flash player. Complexities quickly arise when the people providing the player are hosting your videos, but are not responsible for the rest of your blog, it leads to an understandable focus on the video hosting page rather than your blog page. This may not be considered a probem because the expectation may be that you embed their player in your site, and your site provides all the other bloggy stuff you want. But this doesnt cover scenarios where our show player may be embedded on another site or used as a widget. I see the guide button is optional, and its easy to rebrand the player so that its got your own site in the bottom right hand corner, which is a clickable link pointing to the URL of your choice. Thanks for mentioning that. I had those pointing to the blip shows, basically by default, but I've switched them now so that they point to the blogs for the shows instead of the blip pages. This helps out the permalink situation A LITTLE BIT, but it still takes the viewer to the most recent post in the blog. The only thing that seems to update with the individual video is if you click guide and then read more about this on blip.tv, which takes you to the individual video's page on blip. -- Bill C. BillCammack.com Id love to see the creative commons stuff thats been requested in the past, be rolled out into this show player in the future, whether it be through a little cc icon on the bottom bar of the player, or the inclusion of this info in the popup 'about this episode' tab. I agree about the font size, hmm this stuff starts to get a bit tricky, a big decision to break away from the player being 320x240. I see that Veoh's player is rather large now, but this makes it look quite good and leaves more room for additional info overlays to be displayed in a larger font. Some other services have really wide players with separate episode bars to one side of the video. Personally Im fascinated by the idea of a flash player for wordpress that can display the entire blog, text video etc, in the flash player. I was looking at WPF/E but I think I'll ignore that technology for now, and go buymyself a copy of flash and join the fun. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack mike@ wrote: Michael, For some people the blog format is really important. Cross-posting, copy paste and everything else we've built to support the blog format aren't going away. We're going to keep those features, and we're going to keep improving them. It's just that the blog format isn't right for everyone. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Verdi Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 12:09 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] New blip.tv show player Aaron Steve - you bring up some good points. I do think options for people are important and I do like the ability to look through an archive but the price is that you loose all the other benefits of a blog - permalinks, comments, context, choice of video size and formats. That player is really built on the idea that your blip.tv blog is your blog. So it only shows and links back to your blog posts on
Re: [videoblogging] Re: New blip.tv show player
for video festivals is also great, for new submissions show up automatically. thanks! On 4/16/07, Michael Verdi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes - point taken about it not being a replacement. It's also good for things like user profiles on various social networks. - Verdi On 4/16/07, Bill Cammack [EMAIL PROTECTED]BillCammack%40alum.mit.edu wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Offering both makes a lot of sense to me. I dream of this stuff being pushed to the extreme and for it to be possible for a blog like experience to be completely available from within a flash player. Complexities quickly arise when the people providing the player are hosting your videos, but are not responsible for the rest of your blog, it leads to an understandable focus on the video hosting page rather than your blog page. This may not be considered a probem because the expectation may be that you embed their player in your site, and your site provides all the other bloggy stuff you want. But this doesnt cover scenarios where our show player may be embedded on another site or used as a widget. I see the guide button is optional, and its easy to rebrand the player so that its got your own site in the bottom right hand corner, which is a clickable link pointing to the URL of your choice. Thanks for mentioning that. I had those pointing to the blip shows, basically by default, but I've switched them now so that they point to the blogs for the shows instead of the blip pages. This helps out the permalink situation A LITTLE BIT, but it still takes the viewer to the most recent post in the blog. The only thing that seems to update with the individual video is if you click guide and then read more about this on blip.tv, which takes you to the individual video's page on blip. -- Bill C. BillCammack.com Id love to see the creative commons stuff thats been requested in the past, be rolled out into this show player in the future, whether it be through a little cc icon on the bottom bar of the player, or the inclusion of this info in the popup 'about this episode' tab. I agree about the font size, hmm this stuff starts to get a bit tricky, a big decision to break away from the player being 320x240. I see that Veoh's player is rather large now, but this makes it look quite good and leaves more room for additional info overlays to be displayed in a larger font. Some other services have really wide players with separate episode bars to one side of the video. Personally Im fascinated by the idea of a flash player for wordpress that can display the entire blog, text video etc, in the flash player. I was looking at WPF/E but I think I'll ignore that technology for now, and go buymyself a copy of flash and join the fun. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com, Mike Hudack mike@ wrote: Michael, For some people the blog format is really important. Cross-posting, copy paste and everything else we've built to support the blog format aren't going away. We're going to keep those features, and we're going to keep improving them. It's just that the blog format isn't right for everyone. -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Verdi Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 12:09 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] New blip.tv show player Aaron Steve - you bring up some good points. I do think options for people are important and I do like the ability to look through an archive but the price is that you loose all the other benefits of a blog - permalinks, comments, context, choice of video size and formats. That player is really built on the idea that your blip.tv blog is your blog. So it only shows and links back to your blog posts on blip. Comments? They have to go on the blip blog (as long as the viewer know to click through to the blip blog to leave a comment). Plus you have to have the blip hot shows menu. That thing pulls in stuff completely out of context that you have no control over. Of course you do have control in that you certainly don't have to use the show player at all. I just think the blog part of videoblogging is important and desirable and I feel a little sad when people are so excited about dropping it. - Verdi
Re: [videoblogging] Is LIVE! The Next Frontier?
Yeah. It's funny that it's getting so much attention. Live stuff comes around as The Next Big Thing every year, it seems. But surely it complements, rather than replaces, recorded media. It's just another tool to be able to use cheaply and easily, and increasingly in a Web 2 kind of way. It's interesting to watch when it's a tech innovation - like Steve using his N95 - and if it's someone who has a large audience or readership a certain number are going to tune in... But really, my wife just looked over my shoulder at the video of that guy driving and she then looked at me with such pity and confusion that I find it hard to imagine the general public really getting into watching some dude drive round Hawaii house hunting in large numbers. Unless they've got a LOT of time on their hands, they're going to prefer edited and directed material most of the time. But the live roaming interactivity of it is pretty cool. Yeah - I could have done with this when I was in my suit job, conducting teleconferences with investors in the US - showing them our management and facilities in real time would have been amazing. And I can see myself using it with my family across the world. Like our videoblogging FlashMeetings. On the other hand, you could say that at its core this stuff is just about wireless webcams, which are used in these ways already - and how many of us actually tune in to random webcams for more than a minute or so? Unless there's someone stripping at the other end. Or so I hear. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 16 Apr 2007, at 21:59, Ryan Ozawa wrote: Say, Steve, with your N95 and your live video experiments... were you sending your video out over WiFi, or over the cellular data network (i.e. EVDO or EDGE or whatever)? Todd GeekNewsCentral Cochrane took viewers house hunting all over Honolulu yesterday, and it was oddly riveting... even the driving! And to have a gaggle of people commenting on properties and prices along with him was pretty cool. He was able to read and respond to our comments live: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7839716112523947672hl=en It's getting to the point where this is plug-n-play. The laptop solution would require a camera and data card, the phone solution ain't cheap if the N95 is your pick, but still, imagine what this took two years ago? Now you're looking at under a grand, half that in some cases. Could it be live video will become easier to do than edited and archived? I guess it makes sense in a way... people get synchronous communication naturally. Ryan [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Is LIVE! The Next Frontier?
Yeah, somehow i forgot to add the sentence that indicated the irony of me writing that while posting all the featureless mundanities of my life up from my mobile every day. My wife looks at me during some of my movlogs with the same pity and confusion. (Those that don't feature our baby, mostly). But still, it's a minority pursuit, and not about to take over from edited/directed stuff in terms of either ease, entertainment or popularity, that was my point. On 16 Apr 2007, at 22:50, Rupert wrote: Yeah. It's funny that it's getting so much attention. Live stuff comes around as The Next Big Thing every year, it seems. But surely it complements, rather than replaces, recorded media. It's just another tool to be able to use cheaply and easily, and increasingly in a Web 2 kind of way. It's interesting to watch when it's a tech innovation - like Steve using his N95 - and if it's someone who has a large audience or readership a certain number are going to tune in... But really, my wife just looked over my shoulder at the video of that guy driving and she then looked at me with such pity and confusion that I find it hard to imagine the general public really getting into watching some dude drive round Hawaii house hunting in large numbers. Unless they've got a LOT of time on their hands, they're going to prefer edited and directed material most of the time. But the live roaming interactivity of it is pretty cool. Yeah - I could have done with this when I was in my suit job, conducting teleconferences with investors in the US - showing them our management and facilities in real time would have been amazing. And I can see myself using it with my family across the world. Like our videoblogging FlashMeetings. On the other hand, you could say that at its core this stuff is just about wireless webcams, which are used in these ways already - and how many of us actually tune in to random webcams for more than a minute or so? Unless there's someone stripping at the other end. Or so I hear. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 16 Apr 2007, at 21:59, Ryan Ozawa wrote: Say, Steve, with your N95 and your live video experiments... were you sending your video out over WiFi, or over the cellular data network (i.e. EVDO or EDGE or whatever)? Todd GeekNewsCentral Cochrane took viewers house hunting all over Honolulu yesterday, and it was oddly riveting... even the driving! And to have a gaggle of people commenting on properties and prices along with him was pretty cool. He was able to read and respond to our comments live: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7839716112523947672hl=en It's getting to the point where this is plug-n-play. The laptop solution would require a camera and data card, the phone solution ain't cheap if the N95 is your pick, but still, imagine what this took two years ago? Now you're looking at under a grand, half that in some cases. Could it be live video will become easier to do than edited and archived? I guess it makes sense in a way... people get synchronous communication naturally. Ryan [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Is LIVE! The Next Frontier?
exactly. the strength of livecasting can really shine for citizen jounalistic coverage take for instance todays devastating news out of Virginia. On 4/16/07, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, somehow i forgot to add the sentence that indicated the irony of me writing that while posting all the featureless mundanities of my life up from my mobile every day. My wife looks at me during some of my movlogs with the same pity and confusion. (Those that don't feature our baby, mostly). But still, it's a minority pursuit, and not about to take over from edited/directed stuff in terms of either ease, entertainment or popularity, that was my point. On 16 Apr 2007, at 22:50, Rupert wrote: Yeah. It's funny that it's getting so much attention. Live stuff comes around as The Next Big Thing every year, it seems. But surely it complements, rather than replaces, recorded media. It's just another tool to be able to use cheaply and easily, and increasingly in a Web 2 kind of way. It's interesting to watch when it's a tech innovation - like Steve using his N95 - and if it's someone who has a large audience or readership a certain number are going to tune in... But really, my wife just looked over my shoulder at the video of that guy driving and she then looked at me with such pity and confusion that I find it hard to imagine the general public really getting into watching some dude drive round Hawaii house hunting in large numbers. Unless they've got a LOT of time on their hands, they're going to prefer edited and directed material most of the time. But the live roaming interactivity of it is pretty cool. Yeah - I could have done with this when I was in my suit job, conducting teleconferences with investors in the US - showing them our management and facilities in real time would have been amazing. And I can see myself using it with my family across the world. Like our videoblogging FlashMeetings. On the other hand, you could say that at its core this stuff is just about wireless webcams, which are used in these ways already - and how many of us actually tune in to random webcams for more than a minute or so? Unless there's someone stripping at the other end. Or so I hear. Rupert http://twittervlog.blogspot.com/ http://www.twitter.com/ruperthowe/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ On 16 Apr 2007, at 21:59, Ryan Ozawa wrote: Say, Steve, with your N95 and your live video experiments... were you sending your video out over WiFi, or over the cellular data network (i.e. EVDO or EDGE or whatever)? Todd GeekNewsCentral Cochrane took viewers house hunting all over Honolulu yesterday, and it was oddly riveting... even the driving! And to have a gaggle of people commenting on properties and prices along with him was pretty cool. He was able to read and respond to our comments live: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7839716112523947672hl=en It's getting to the point where this is plug-n-play. The laptop solution would require a camera and data card, the phone solution ain't cheap if the N95 is your pick, but still, imagine what this took two years ago? Now you're looking at under a grand, half that in some cases. Could it be live video will become easier to do than edited and archived? I guess it makes sense in a way... people get synchronous communication naturally. Ryan [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] CBS on Joost
http://www.joost.com/blog/2007/04/cbs-has-its-eye-on-joost.html [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Make Internet TV
I think those of us that can have to. I'm looking at an equipment page that is recommending Aiptek camcorders. They are the only camera/camcorder listed. http://mitvwiki.org/Video_Equipment Ewww. I love cheap cameras/camcorders but this is like asking a wine collector to suck down on Night Train. For those across the ocean, Night Train and Mad Dog 20/20 are the absolutely cheapest worse wines that can be purchased in the U.S. There would be better suited to used as lighter fluid than human consumption. Anyway, there are limits! Laundry or the higher purpose? Taxes or writing a proper essay on camera/camcorder buying. Yeah, I know. I'll sign up to the wiki. Trying not to heave, Gena http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com http://pcclibtech.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mark Schoneveld [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In case y'all don't read BoingBoing religiously like I do, Cory just posted a plug for the new Participatory Culture Foundation project called Make Internet TV. It's not earth-shattering for those of us who've been making videos for web for a while, but if you've got friends you're tired of explaining the How-To's to, this is where to send them! Basic and to the point. And for those of you wiki fans out there, they've got a wiki to make the whole thing better and more informative. I don't doubt some of you will be in there, cranking away it. :) http://makeinternettv.org/
Re: [videoblogging] Re: when posting a podcast wich format should I use? _apple?_Rating?
IMHO, don't listen to Apple or Microsoft or Adobe when picking your format. They want you to believe there is a standard format, that's how they make money, but it isn't the case. There is no one holy grail video format on the web. There is no MP3 of video presently. To reach the most people you need to deploy multiple formats. It seems to me that the current consensus opinion is that 3 formats cover most bases: .FLV for in-browser viewing (all those Flash players you see on the video sites). For downloading and feed readers: QuickTime (iPod/Apple TV/iTunes-compatible) and Windows Media (Media Center and other devices). Good luck! On 4/16/07, Daryl Urig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if I chose .QuickTime what primary directories would I limit myself from? if I chose .swf what primary directories would I limit myself from? Daryl --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow, I thought this was a brilliant post, Gena. We should save cool things like this on the Wiki. http://videoblogginggroup.pbwiki.com/ Looking at it, there's not an immediately apparent space for How To stuff like this that I can see. There's resources: links to other sites, and there's links on the front page to Freevlog and Feevlog. I thought we should set up a section which can hold pages of info like this with titles like When making a podcast which format should I use (which itself links to Freevlog, but has other context opinion as well)? But I don't want to go messing with the wiki format that's been carefully laid out already, and make it all messy. Rupert On 15 Apr 2007, at 22:07, Gena wrote: Ok, Let me take a shot at this. You can have any size you want. If you want to post postage size video that is fine. The following pertains to vlogs, web video and video on the Internet. Back in the day when more folks were on dial-up you had to balance many factors such as the dimensions, file size, video resolution and quality. I pulled out one of my old video books and these were the suggested sizes in the past: Delivery/Dimension/Frames Per Second/Audio E-mail 160x120 10fps Mono 22.05kHz Web video 240x180 12fps Stereo 22.05 kHz CD-ROM 320x240 15fps Stereo 44.1kHz If you were placing video on a web site circa 1999 the above would have been fine. But technology has moved forward. In 2005 the recommended/suggested/used (pick one)dimension of video on blogs was 320x240. Video placed on blogs/vlog at 320x240 best meet those needs of the viewers and content producers. It is still used. But it isn't the only way to do this. It is now 2007. Times have changed. You still have to balance the factors however more people are on high speed connections. There is also the introduction of digital camcorders that can record in different aspect ratios or recording dimensions. For example, 640x480 and 320x240 are in the 4:3 aspect ratio or more square like video. Same shape as an Analog TV screen. The newer digital camcorders have the ability to record 16:9 or more rectangular, like the way it looks like when you view DVD movies on analog TV sets. Your Apple TV screen is in the 16:9 aspect ratio. It is a matter of choice. Your choice on what will best serve the kind of video you are delivering. I'm really simplifying here folks so if the techies want to jump in feel free. I just want to provide a conceptual understanding. Over at Freevlog there are videos that might make it clear to you what is going on. Ryanne has her favorite compression settings http://www.freevlog.org/index.php/2007/01/14/screencast-ryannes- favorite-compression-settings/ If you just want to output to the iPod format then view http://www.freevlog.org/index.php/2007/03/19/41-compress-for-the-web- imovie/ If you are on Windows check out Michael's example. Even if you are a Mac person check it out. http://www.freevlog.org/index.php/2007/03/19/4-compress-for-the-web- windows-movie-maker/ Keep asking questions, Gena http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com http://pcclibtech.blogspot.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Daryl Urig daryl@ wrote: I am confused. Can someone read my setting's below in previous question osted? I am told apple tv is: 640 x 480, 30 frames per sec., and I am also told this: Yes. The standard resolution for ANY videoblog should be 320x240. Anything else and you're really making it rather difficult for those of who watch via the PC. Can someone make this clear for me? Also see question below. Thanks. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Cook patsvideoblog@ wrote: Hi everyone: On 4/14/07, Daryl Urig daryl@ wrote: With the sound
[videoblogging] Re: Our Apple TV Settings
MPEG Streamclip, free download, has an ipod setting with options for multipass and bit-rate limiting. I like it, but I have no ipod to test it out. MPEG Streamclip has a 2-gig input limit, fine for joining and transcoding from VOB, if you have DVD sources for your COUHF show. I run into trouble with my AVI exports from Virtualdub. Uncompressed RGB allows me up to 90 seconds or some-such. I get 9 minutes from Panasonic DV codec. However, transcoding to XviD at best quality could be suitable as an intermediate on the way to h.264 for your feature length movies. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Chumley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My bad Steve, yeah your right its low-complexity instead of simple. Now that we have our words right again I ask the community, does anyone know of a good transcoder that handles the low-complexity h.264 MP4 conversions (640x480 ipod compatable with bitrate manipulation) on the PC? I've tried Videora, but the darn thing loses sound sync so bad that its almost worthless. I would appreciate any tips all, I really would like to be able to go 640x480 with my next episode. Rev. Chumley http://www.cultofuhf.com
[videoblogging] adding a html link at the end of a qt movie
hi Can someone tell me how to add a html link to the end of a quicktime movie?
[videoblogging] OurMedia Updated
I noticed one of my VBW07 videos was getting hit on via ourmedia... a surprise. An even better surprise is that the site UI has been updated for the first time since we launched this beast at the first vloggercon. Take a look. http://ourmedia.org Nice work... and please keep going :) Sull [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
