Re: [videoblogging] Nokia N93 users
I got mine in January. It's had a LOT of use, and even though it's pretty battle damaged, it's still going strong. In the UK we have a 3G phone network, so I get to use it as a phone as well as a video camera. You can see it in action on all 190 or so posts at http:// twittervlog.tv/ It's brilliant. But it does crash occasionally. And it's poor in low light. That's about all the bad things I have to say about it. The battery's pretty good. Good enough for me, anyway. The N95 is the one with real battery problems, I hear, but that's a lot to do with all the things you have running on the system, like GPS. It has a built-in editor and wifi, so you can shoot, cut and email your video to Blip, who will then auto-crosspost to your blog if you want (and add tags). You need never touch a bloody computer to post a videoblog ;) I got the cheapest mini SD memory card I could - 2GB - and didn't notice any change in the crashing frequency or speed of it. Other people on this list who have them are David Howell and Steve Garfield. Go for it - good luck :) On 24 Oct 2007, at 23:54, johnleeke wrote: I'm ready to buy an N93 for vlogging here in the US. Where did you buy yours? When? What brand of memory chip works best? How many hours/minutes of video shooting do you get per battery charge? Have you had any battery problems? (I've heard of poor-performance batteries discarding by the factory slipping back into the market.) Thanks for your help. John [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: pocketPC video editor?
Im reasonably sure video editing on the pocketpc will get better, but Im not sure if windows mobile is likely to be the dominant pocket os in the future, the pocketpc is getting battered from all sides these days. I think it might be more likely that editing capabilities will be built into more camcorders etc in future. And if there is a future iphone that records video, or some other mobile mac device that makes use of multitouch screen, we could be in for a treat. On the camcorder front I suppose its feasible that the cameras of the future will be wifi enabled. In the meantime, I think nokia mobile video editing stuff possibly has the largest potential audience right now, in terms of number of people who buy nokia phones, but this may not be so true in the USA, and the lack of touchscreen or large enough screen is a hindrance. I dunno, I guess its one of those things that would be incredibly useful if done right, but only a very small %age of people who buy suitable devices will actually use this feature. I havent ended up using the basic video editing on the nokia N95 much yet, its just a tad too painful, but I guess I would use it if I were travelling the world or taking speedvlogging to an extreme. If the economy doesnt slow development pace, I think we are about to see mobile devices of all kinds reach a new level of useability, so the next few years should see some of these hopes come true. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone: On 10/23/07, Renat Zarbailov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I actually thought about this idea while traveling the world. I doubt that the processors of Windows Mobile devices are fast enough to allow editing of raw video, even if it's mobile phone shot compressed video. I, however, hope that one day there will be a Windows Mobile flash- based software that allows miniature video editing on the go. So, imagine the hard drive based camcorders would in-camera convert the video files to this mobile edit-friendly format, be it in 320X240 DIVX or other non-processor-intensive format. Allowing transfer of these file from camcorder via Bluetooth or memorystick to a Windows Mobile device. So while on the road, say, when still in transit to where the full-fledged editing workstation is, one can edit the clips on a Windows Mobile device, and later, after importing the raw equvivalent of those video clips, this mobile software will transfer all the math behind the edit so that all the raw video clips are presented just like in the mobile editor. This will be a big time saver for videographers who shoot they dailies outside the editing studios. After having done some searching on CNET, it looks as though that YOUR ONLY option for DOING ANYTHING with video on a Pocket PC would be via a site like YouTube, Google Video, etc. So to sum up all the above; 1. Footage shot and each raw video clip on the hard drive of the camcorder has a mobile editable version 2. Either via bluetooth or memorystick, these files are transfered into a Windows Mobile device 3. Footage is edited, cuts, transitions, effects, etc. 4. When in the studio the miniature edit is sycronized with FCP or Premiere by importing the raw video clips and placing the edit in the timeline just like in the timeline of the Windows Mobile video editor. What do you guys think? Should we start harrassing camcorder manufacturers as well as finding the right talent to create this mobile software? :)) Not just for pocket Windows PCs, but for Macs as well. Of course it's idealistic, but, wouldn't it be great?? It appears so - In an ideal world that is. Cheers -- Pat Cook Denver, Colorado PODCASTS - **NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http://asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.com/ PAT'S REAL DEAL VIDEO BLOG - http://patsrealdeal.livejournal.com/ PAT'S HEALTH MEDICAL WONDERS VIDEOCAST - http://patshealthmedicalwondersvideocast.blogspot.com/ YOUTUBE CHANNEL - http://www.youtube.com/amwowttv/ THE PAT COOK SHOW - http://www.livevideo.com/thepcshow THE PAT COOK SHOW (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/ THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/
[videoblogging] Re: Nokia N93 users
Yeah Ive got the N95 and whilst the ability to watch h264 videos on it is nice, I dont think it renders the N93 obsolete, either of these models would be a good choice depending on exactly what else you want from the device. The N95 is definately a bit heavy on the battery use, which isnt a problem for me but could be considered a fatal flaw for some. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I got mine in January. It's had a LOT of use, and even though it's pretty battle damaged, it's still going strong. In the UK we have a 3G phone network, so I get to use it as a phone as well as a video camera. You can see it in action on all 190 or so posts at http:// twittervlog.tv/ It's brilliant. But it does crash occasionally. And it's poor in low light. That's about all the bad things I have to say about it. The battery's pretty good. Good enough for me, anyway. The N95 is the one with real battery problems, I hear, but that's a lot to do with all the things you have running on the system, like GPS. It has a built-in editor and wifi, so you can shoot, cut and email your video to Blip, who will then auto-crosspost to your blog if you want (and add tags). You need never touch a bloody computer to post a videoblog ;) I got the cheapest mini SD memory card I could - 2GB - and didn't notice any change in the crashing frequency or speed of it. Other people on this list who have them are David Howell and Steve Garfield. Go for it - good luck :) On 24 Oct 2007, at 23:54, johnleeke wrote: I'm ready to buy an N93 for vlogging here in the US. Where did you buy yours? When? What brand of memory chip works best? How many hours/minutes of video shooting do you get per battery charge? Have you had any battery problems? (I've heard of poor-performance batteries discarding by the factory slipping back into the market.) Thanks for your help. John [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Nokia N93 users
Ive not heard that specific tale about batteries, but it might apply to buying an extra battery from a 3rd party. Nokia bateries are not that cheap, so when some appear for sale at amazing prices, some people tend to think they are either fakes or defective ones, and they could be right. But as for the battery you will get with the Nokia when you buy it, I would think if there were any problems with it then youd be well within your rights to get it exchanged. As for where to buy, Im not in the USA so probably cant help. And regarding memory sticks, Im not so sure about the N93, its possible the N95 can support the larger capacity sticks that now exist, and the N93 cant, but need to check my facts on that one. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, johnleeke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you had any battery problems? (I've heard of poor-performance batteries discarding by the factory slipping back into the market.) Thanks for your help. John
Re: [videoblogging] NaVloPoMo - National Videoblog Posting Month, anyone?
i joined the ning thing. will try to output some more vids. my canon elph was lost since July and havent replaced it yet. will have to bring out the GL1 again. low-quality out the window ;) ning is buggy! sull On 10/22/07, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: http://www.profy.com/2007/10/22/nablopomo/ You may have heard of the seemingly crazy NaNoWriMo, where people sign on to write a novel in the month of November. In response to NaNoWriMo, one blogger decided to have a little fun and create NaBloPoMo - write a blog post a day for the month of November. This year she is already over 1500 participants and counting, all because she tapped into the power of [Ning} to grow her movement. You can see the NaBloPoMo Ning group here: http://nablopomo.ning.com/ I know we have videoblogging week, and that's hard enough. But how about a month where we strip away worries about production values and editing and just post simple short videos, one per day - starting November 1st? Use your phone, your webcam, your iSight - make lumieres, moving snapshots? Or whatever you want. As long as you post some moving images, every day. Just a thought. Personally, I'll be writing a novel every day in November, so I'll be far too busy for doing something so insane ;) Rupert http://twittervlog.tv/ http://feeds.feedburner.com/twittervlog/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: another argument for Net Neutrality laws
Whilst it may sound like defeatism, I dont believe the future will bring any holy grail net neutrality laws. The best can hope for is that certain rights of users will be enshrined in law, but I dont think it will be as all encompassing as the term net neutrality suggests. Specifically, the war on p2p has indeed oved to the ISP level. Here in the UK the government are actively encouraging ISPs to do something about illegal p2p stuff. They want voluntary agreements, otherwise they arethreatening to legislate to make such things illegal, or shift the burden onto the ISPs: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7059881.stm Now as usual when technology meets legal and business issues, things get a bit messy, and its never clear how practical the lawmakers plans are, so its not entirely clear what will happen. This p2p side of net neutrality is not a pure example of net neutrality issues, because its more like the latest chapter in the music industrys battle against piracy, than about ISPs giving different levels of service to different sites based on deals done. Where ISPs have acted to 'shape p2p taffic', its often been for commercial reasons, ie their networks cant handle the load so rather than invest in more capacity, punish certain heavy users or try to automatically shape certain traffic, eg bittorrent. Meanwhile on the mobile front, Nokia has started to annoy various mobile networks by doing deals with content providers to put videos in nokias video center app. The carriers wanted to be the guardians of such content, to get some exclusivity to differentiate their product, but if Nokia gets its way then its the device they buy that determines the content in the video portal, not the network used. They may try to punish Nokia for this by not offering the relevent nokia phones to their customers. Or they may come to terms with the fact they dont get to be portal masters after all, and just make some money for data cahrges. Will probably remain messy for years to come. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Will there be a time when corporate-owned internet providers start choosing what goes through their networks? Some believe it's happening now, and they seem to have legal right to do it. Comcast, one of the biggest US internet providers, is showing signs of limiting P2P networks. *http://tinyurl.com/yv7ddg *The problem here is that anti-regulation advocates can't promise that there is competition in bandwidth providers. So it makes it impossible for us to vote with our dollars. In a perfect free market, customers would be free to pack up in leave Comcast for greener and more open broadband pastures, but the competitive landscape in the US doesn't always provide that kind of choice. More than a few Comcast customers are faced with the choice of Comcast or dial-up, leaving them with the Hobson's choice of hoping their data packets can evade Comcast's traffic shaping police or not having broadband service at all. Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Video: http://ryanishungry.com Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Nokia N93 users
I was desperate enough to buy an apparently genuine Nokia battery from a dealer in Liverpool Street Station. Worked for about half an hour, then completely broke. But I only paid £10 for it, so I should have known. I didn't really care. I needed to make some calls and a video, and it let me do that. I hadn't heard the rumour about defective batteries slipping back into the market, but that makes sense. It was identical to the battery I got with my phone (which was fine, of course), including the hologram. Rupert On 25 Oct 2007, at 15:08, Steve Watkins wrote: Ive not heard that specific tale about batteries, but it might apply to buying an extra battery from a 3rd party. Nokia bateries are not that cheap, so when some appear for sale at amazing prices, some people tend to think they are either fakes or defective ones, and they could be right. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, johnleeke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you had any battery problems? (I've heard of poor-performance batteries discarding by the factory slipping back into the market.) Thanks for your help. John [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: pocketPC video editor?
Yeah. Although, Windows Mobile devices seem to be pretty popular in the states anyway. I just upgraded my phone to a new Windows Mobile 6 (wm6) device, and the OS is quite nice (a significant improvement over wm5 which wasn't too bad itself). Windows has an advantage in the cell phone market similar to the advantage they have in the PC market their OS can be licensed and installed on hardware that others make. So you'll have HTC devices running windows mobile (which are really nice little devices), you'll have palm devices running windows ...etc etc etc There's also no shortage of developers out there making windows mobile apps. My windows phone can store music and video, and stream tv shows, and get my email, and twitter, and websites, and google maps w/ GPS, and Instant Messengers and on and on and on and on ... and its pretty nice interface even if not multi-touch ... so Windows isn't out of the game at all. ( That being said ... if the iPhone did video and was 3g I'd have gone with the iPhone no questions asked. :-) ) With a mobile version of .NET and DirectX available ... I'm sure the windows mobile platform COULD do simple trim/combine edits on video ... I just think that nobody has written the app to actually do it yet. :(( If anyone comes across such an app for windows mobile please let me know :-) - Dave On 10/25/07, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Im reasonably sure video editing on the pocketpc will get better, but Im not sure if windows mobile is likely to be the dominant pocket os in the future, the pocketpc is getting battered from all sides these days. I think it might be more likely that editing capabilities will be built into more camcorders etc in future. And if there is a future iphone that records video, or some other mobile mac device that makes use of multitouch screen, we could be in for a treat. On the camcorder front I suppose its feasible that the cameras of the future will be wifi enabled. In the meantime, I think nokia mobile video editing stuff possibly has the largest potential audience right now, in terms of number of people who buy nokia phones, but this may not be so true in the USA, and the lack of touchscreen or large enough screen is a hindrance. I dunno, I guess its one of those things that would be incredibly useful if done right, but only a very small %age of people who buy suitable devices will actually use this feature. I havent ended up using the basic video editing on the nokia N95 much yet, its just a tad too painful, but I guess I would use it if I were travelling the world or taking speedvlogging to an extreme. If the economy doesnt slow development pace, I think we are about to see mobile devices of all kinds reach a new level of useability, so the next few years should see some of these hopes come true. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone: On 10/23/07, Renat Zarbailov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I actually thought about this idea while traveling the world. I doubt that the processors of Windows Mobile devices are fast enough to allow editing of raw video, even if it's mobile phone shot compressed video. I, however, hope that one day there will be a Windows Mobile flash- based software that allows miniature video editing on the go. So, imagine the hard drive based camcorders would in-camera convert the video files to this mobile edit-friendly format, be it in 320X240 DIVX or other non-processor-intensive format. Allowing transfer of these file from camcorder via Bluetooth or memorystick to a Windows Mobile device. So while on the road, say, when still in transit to where the full-fledged editing workstation is, one can edit the clips on a Windows Mobile device, and later, after importing the raw equvivalent of those video clips, this mobile software will transfer all the math behind the edit so that all the raw video clips are presented just like in the mobile editor. This will be a big time saver for videographers who shoot they dailies outside the editing studios. After having done some searching on CNET, it looks as though that YOUR ONLY option for DOING ANYTHING with video on a Pocket PC would be via a site like YouTube, Google Video, etc. So to sum up all the above; 1. Footage shot and each raw video clip on the hard drive of the camcorder has a mobile editable version 2. Either via bluetooth or memorystick, these files are transfered into a Windows Mobile device 3. Footage is edited, cuts, transitions, effects, etc. 4. When in the studio the miniature edit is sycronized with FCP or Premiere by importing the raw video clips and placing the edit in the timeline just like in the timeline of the Windows Mobile video editor. What do you guys think? Should we start harrassing camcorder
[videoblogging] [Reminder] America's Top Model @ Thu Oct 25 4pm - 10pm (Jan McLaughlin)
Jan McLaughlin, this is a reminder for Title: America's Top Model Time: Thu Oct 25 4pm - 10pm (Eastern Time) Calendar: Jan McLaughlin You can view this event at http://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEWeid=cXYzdmNvcWwxZm02dGZ2Y2FqdGVhaDkwZ2MgamFubmllLmphbkBttok=MjAjamFubmllLmphbkBnbWFpbC5jb21lYzEzMWY4NjhkMmQyOWNmZTc2MWMyODI0NzExZGU2ZDkyMTU4NjI0ctz=America%2FNew_Yorkhl=en You can also view your calendar at http://www.google.com/calendar/ You are receiving this email at the account [EMAIL PROTECTED] because you are subscribed for reminders on calendar Jan McLaughlin. To stop receiving these notifications, please log in to http://www.google.com/calendar/ and change your notification settings for this calendar. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: halloween vlogfest 2007?
Oh Man!!! This makes me so sad. This was such a great party last year!! Do people have their Halloween videos ready to go? -Patricia AnthroVlog.com On YouTube: AnthroVlog __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[videoblogging] WordPress entries backup?
Can you please suggest a fast way to backup entries from a blog built with WordPress, so they can be used locally? For example, I'd like to backup all entries from certain period on my site and wouldn't want to copy/paste each of them manually. As for videos, I guess link to blip.tv files would be changeable to local file. Thank you for your time and help! GoGen gogentv.com
[videoblogging] cleaning up gaps in iMovie clips panel
Is there any way in iMovie, or possibly a plugin to clean up all the gaps in the clips pane? I've got one projects with over 200 clips and it looks a jigsaw puzzle. Thanks John Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [videoblogging] WordPress entries backup?
You can use WP's built-in export function: Manage Export That will export an RSS feed of all entries in your database. or you can use WP Database Backup for more control over what gets included: http://www.ilfilosofo.com/blog/wp-db-backup/ On 10/25/07, GoGen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can you please suggest a fast way to backup entries from a blog built with WordPress, so they can be used locally? For example, I'd like to backup all entries from certain period on my site and wouldn't want to copy/paste each of them manually. As for videos, I guess link to blip.tv files would be changeable to local file. Thank you for your time and help! GoGen gogentv.com Yahoo! Groups Links -- Adam Quirk Wreck Salvage 551.208.4644 Brooklyn, NY http://wreckandsalvage.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] videos at PodcastPickle?
Anyone know how to set up a video podcast at PodcastPickle? The ADD CAST screen has nothing specific for video. I've added my 'cast .. but they call it an audio cast, not a video cast, and my questions to them (both direct and in the forum) have not been answered. http://podcastpickle.com/cast/28873 Richard Amirault Boston, MA, USA http://n1jdu.org http://bostonfandom.org http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7hf9u2ZdlQ
Re: [videoblogging] Any Video Podcasters In Dallas/ Ft Worth Area?
I think the geekbrief people are there http://geekbrief.com ... Richard On 10/15/07, softballjunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am just wondering if there are any video podcasters in the Dallas/ Ft Worth area of Texas? -- Richard http://richardhhall.org Shows http://richardshow.org http://inspiredhealing.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] RUNtv will pay $50 for non-exclusive use of your videos
Josh, You probably posted this before, but are there some constraints on the video? (e.g., how long, what format, what size, what type of content, etc). ... thanks ... Richard On 10/16/07, Josh Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I've posted about the television show I've been putting together for the past couple months, and managed to generate a few submissions and I was hoping maybe a few more of you would be willing to rise to the occasion under the new terms. The original show offered payment for use of the top voted videos; but no one voted. So instead we've decided to just give $50 to every vid we use. Our next show airs Sunday night, so send me you links as soon as possible! Again, we're not asking for exclusivity , just the non-exclusive right to air your video on the show which is broadcast on an Oakland college cable station. We'll also link to your video on the site, and would love it if you'd be willing to extend the use of your work for other gaps in our programming (but that's optional). So how about it? Anyone want $50... please send links to your submissions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] josh%40riseupnetwork.com PS - thanks to everyone who has already contributed content; we will be sending out all the checks at the end of the November when the season wraps up. I'm sorry for the delay but that's the nature of bureaucracy. -- Richard http://richardhhall.org Shows http://richardshow.org http://inspiredhealing.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: RUNtv will pay $50 for non-exclusive use of your videos
Josh: You may consider any of my videos about restoring historic buidings: http://johnleeke.blip.tv/posts/?user=JohnLeeke John
[videoblogging] Re: RUNtv will pay $50 for non-exclusive use of your videos
Josh: You may consider any of my videos about restoring historic buidings: http://johnleeke.blip.tv/posts/?user=JohnLeeke John
[videoblogging] Re: WordPress entries backup?
Hmm... That's good information. I never checked out Manage Export. I just got the backup plug-in right off the bat. -- Bill http://billcammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adam Quirk, Wreck Salvage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can use WP's built-in export function: Manage Export That will export an RSS feed of all entries in your database. or you can use WP Database Backup for more control over what gets included: http://www.ilfilosofo.com/blog/wp-db-backup/ On 10/25/07, GoGen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can you please suggest a fast way to backup entries from a blog built with WordPress, so they can be used locally? For example, I'd like to backup all entries from certain period on my site and wouldn't want to copy/paste each of them manually. As for videos, I guess link to blip.tv files would be changeable to local file. Thank you for your time and help! GoGen gogentv.com Yahoo! Groups Links -- Adam Quirk Wreck Salvage 551.208.4644 Brooklyn, NY http://wreckandsalvage.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Can anybody tell me....
around the 8/10/07 Bill Cammack mentioned about [videoblogging] Can anybody tell me that: Can anybody tell me how come people aren't bitching and moaning about copyrighted music in: A) Public Access shows across the country I can't speak for US but in Australia if there is music and you don't have copyright clearance it will not be broadcast. end of discussion. we have community statios here who regularly get sent great stuff from secondary schools but of course it has a soundtrack with music with no clearance, it cannot be broadcast. i also teach in a uni. media program and we have an expectation of all work from year one that it complies with copyright requirements. We don't want graduates going to work and getting their employers sued because they haven't learnt the basics of media and copyright law. lifecasting is interesting. Personally i think they should just let you pay a nominal amount, eg USD50 a year, and that is your licence so that while lifecasting if there is music in the background, you've paid a licence. same way here inn australia you can play music in your shop (you pay an annual licence to the Australian Performing Rights Association and they distribute the money to the artists). -- cheers Adrian Miles this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x] vogmae.net.au [official compliance stuff:] CRICOS provider code: 00122A
[videoblogging] Re: Can anybody tell me....
Thanks for the insights, Adrian. :) --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Miles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: around the 8/10/07 Bill Cammack mentioned about [videoblogging] Can anybody tell me that: Can anybody tell me how come people aren't bitching and moaning about copyrighted music in: A) Public Access shows across the country I can't speak for US but in Australia if there is music and you don't have copyright clearance it will not be broadcast. end of discussion. we have community statios here who regularly get sent great stuff from secondary schools but of course it has a soundtrack with music with no clearance, it cannot be broadcast. I may not have been clear about what I mean by public access stations here in the US. Then again, you may understand what they are. Just in case... The way things work (to grossly generalize, based on my experiences in Manhattan, NYC) is you apply to the station to get a time slot, 30 minutes or an hour. If/when you get your slot, it will either be before or after a certain hour, which determines how risque or vulgar your show can be. You give them the name of your show and the topic. Depending on the topic, your show might ONLY be slated for late-night airings. After that, it's up to you to provide the show to the station. They play whatever's there for your show at the time your show comes up. For this reason, sometimes, they will play the exact same show for three weeks in a row, because nobody went to change it. The point of all this background information is to set up the fact that there isn't anyone screening these videos for content. Because of this, you have some shows that are ENTIRELY music videos ripped from television stations with the television station bug still in the corner (MTV, VH1, BET, whatever). So I'm not even talking about someone using the music in the background of their original content. The only thing original about their show might be them talking in between ripped videos, IF that. Meanwhile, I've been to parties that were COMPLETELY VJed from YouTube. I mean, even that fad going on right now, Rick Rolling points to an actual music video. I'm not interested enough to research who posted that there, but you see the point. There's tons of stuff on YouTube also that has ZERO clearance. My point isn't being 'anti' either of these situations. It's just odd to me that people make SUCH a big deal out of whether someone uses copyrighted music in a videoblog that ~ 200 people are going to see during about a six month run, and meanwhile, you have the exact same music, the ENTIRE music video, on YouTube with 500,000 hits over the last year. Someone mentioned that perhaps it was because local public access channels have such a low viewership, but then, shouldn't that apply to videoblogs with low viewership as well? The whole thing's really weird. I'll be interested to see how it all shakes out. i also teach in a uni. media program and we have an expectation of all work from year one that it complies with copyright requirements. We don't want graduates going to work and getting their employers sued because they haven't learnt the basics of media and copyright law. Yes. That's smart. People need to know what they're getting into. lifecasting is interesting. Personally i think they should just let you pay a nominal amount, eg USD50 a year, and that is your licence so that while lifecasting if there is music in the background, you've paid a licence. same way here inn australia you can play music in your shop (you pay an annual licence to the Australian Performing Rights Association and they distribute the money to the artists). -- cheers Adrian Miles this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x] vogmae.net.au [official compliance stuff:] CRICOS provider code: 00122A That's an interesting idea. Who would pay this license? The web site that's hosting the channel(s), or in the case of multiple channels, would each channel be responsible for paying their own fee? Even what you're saying is interesting to me. Why should shop owners need to pay a fee to play music in their shops when someone could sit down at their shop and play music from their radio or laptop license-free? I mean, I understand WHY... since the music is adding value to the owner's shop, but you see how it doesn't make any sense? You can play your radio, that you bought with your own money, that's receiving music from radio stations, in the park and pay nothing. You can play your own CDs, that you bought with your own money, on a laptop and pay nothing. One can argue that the licensing fee was built into the CD that the person bought or whatever media the radio station's playing. However, if that's the case, why isn't that same license built into music that someone on YouTube bought with their own money and put in the background of their non-commercial video? Seems like more than a DOUBLE
[videoblogging] Re: How Do I Fix My Poor Video Resolution Issues?
If you want an fool-proof encoding approach, I would suggest using Brighcove. Sign up for a free account and use their Brightcove Publisher which converts any raw video fromat to 500kbps video. After that create a player for each new video you uploaded using the brightcove console. Cheers --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, gerrytshow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Everyone! I've been noticing lately that my videos are suffering from poor video resolution and I was wondering if my save the file settings in Window Media Maker needs to be adjusted to increase the video resolution. I'm currently using a Sony DCR-HC40 camera and a Broadband connection. If my memory serves me correctly I was using another setting which I can't remember what it was before I started having these issues. What's the best setting for uploading videos that are no larger than 65MB and are being uploaded to Blip. Thanks in advance for your suggestions and help regarding this matter. Gerry T The Gerry T Show Where Dating Mating Always Come Together http://TheGerryTShow.Blip.TV http://GerryT.com
[videoblogging] Re: Can anybody tell me....
around the 25/10/07 Bill Cammack mentioned about [videoblogging] Re: Can anybody tell me that: Even what you're saying is interesting to me. Why should shop owners need to pay a fee to play music in their shops when someone could sit down at their shop and play music from their radio or laptop license-free? I mean, I understand WHY... since the music is adding value to the owner's shop, but you see how it doesn't make any sense? You can play your radio, that you bought with your own money, that's receiving music from radio stations, in the park and pay nothing. You can play your own CDs, that you bought with your own money, on a laptop and pay nothing. One can argue that the licensing fee was built into the CD that the person bought or whatever media the radio station's playing. However, if that's the case, why isn't that same license built into music that someone on YouTube bought with their own money and put in the background of their non-commercial video? Seems like more than a DOUBLE standard... Seems like A FEW different I'll answer this in bits :-) there is a distinction made between personal use nad broadcasting. turning on the stereo in the shop becomes broadcasting. it isn't about adding value, it is simply a technical definition of broadcasting. Radio stations here pay APRA fees, which cost more than the restaurant's :-) As do dance clubs. The fee is reasonable and its aim is not to stop the practice but to return royalties to the artists. I don't know the specifics, but I do know that radio stations sent their playlists to APRA, and also that they do spot audits just to try to get an idea of the sors of material being played so that they have a reasonable idea of who should be getting the royalties. youtube, you're broadcasting. So the rules are different for making a home movie that once upon a time really was a home movie (ie was only viewed at home by immediate family/friends). Personally I like the licence system as it provides revenue back to copyright holders. Related to all this, i know we all would like to use our favourite bands on our videos but if they have copyright, or signed it away, and we don't have a licence ot use it, we can't. But at the moment while this is pretty silly in this day and age, my response is just to find material that can be used and encourage and support this alterrnative copyright economy and regime. I'm a sad idealist, i don't think you will get far with Sony et al, so I prefer to go around them by using material they don't control. if we do this enough then the power of the big owners must decline simply because they no longer control access to publishing/distribution/broadcasting and as importantly now republishing/redistribution/rebroadcasting/remxing. -- cheers Adrian Miles this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x] vogmae.net.au [official compliance stuff:] CRICOS provider code: 00122A
[videoblogging] Re: Can anybody tell me....
around the 25/10/07 Bill Cammack mentioned about [videoblogging] Re: Can anybody tell me that: I may not have been clear about what I mean by public access stations here in the US. Then again, you may understand what they are. Just in case... The way things work (to grossly generalize, based on my experiences in Manhattan, NYC) is you apply to the station to get a time slot, 30 minutes or an hour. If/when you get your slot, it will either be before or after a certain hour, which determines how risque or vulgar your show can be. You give them the name of your show and the topic. Depending on the topic, your show might ONLY be slated for late-night airings. After that, it's up to you to provide the show to the station. They play whatever's there for your show at the time your show comes up. For this reason, sometimes, they will play the exact same show for three weeks in a row, because nobody went to change it. here the community system is different. the broadcaster is still responsible for content, though like the US system anyone can come and pitch shows/content. It is like editors ot the editor. the editor and the newspaper owner is responsible for what is published even if it is a letter to the editor. The point of all this background information is to set up the fact that there isn't anyone screening these videos for content. Because of this, you have some shows that are ENTIRELY music videos ripped from television stations with the television station bug still in the corner (MTV, VH1, BET, whatever). So I'm not even talking about someone using the music in the background of their original content. The only thing original about their show might be them talking in between ripped videos, IF that. The only problem I have with these things is that if you do this to others content you can hardly complain when someone does it to yours. For example on this list there have been numerous examples of third party sites aggregating other people's video without credit, etc. But if in your videos you have been reusing others material without a licence, I think you're in a glass house throwing stones :-) Meanwhile, I've been to parties that were COMPLETELY VJed from YouTube. I mean, even that fad going on right now, Rick Rolling points to an actual music video. I'm not interested enough to research who posted that there, but you see the point. There's tons of stuff on YouTube also that has ZERO clearance. yep. welcome to the pointy end of diy media. we are all in the middle of these enormous changes and we can see that google are working rather hard to allay the anxieties of big media while also getting to keep the cake -- cheers Adrian Miles this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x] vogmae.net.au [official compliance stuff:] CRICOS provider code: 00122A
[videoblogging] Re: Can anybody tell me....
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Miles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: around the 25/10/07 Bill Cammack mentioned about [videoblogging] Re: Can anybody tell me that: Even what you're saying is interesting to me. Why should shop owners need to pay a fee to play music in their shops when someone could sit down at their shop and play music from their radio or laptop license-free? I mean, I understand WHY... since the music is adding value to the owner's shop, but you see how it doesn't make any sense? You can play your radio, that you bought with your own money, that's receiving music from radio stations, in the park and pay nothing. You can play your own CDs, that you bought with your own money, on a laptop and pay nothing. One can argue that the licensing fee was built into the CD that the person bought or whatever media the radio station's playing. However, if that's the case, why isn't that same license built into music that someone on YouTube bought with their own money and put in the background of their non-commercial video? Seems like more than a DOUBLE standard... Seems like A FEW different I'll answer this in bits :-) there is a distinction made between personal use nad broadcasting. turning on the stereo in the shop becomes broadcasting. it isn't about adding value, it is simply a technical definition of broadcasting. ok. So how is (and I'm not disagreeing with you :D) playing your radio in the park NOT broadcasting? What if more people can hear your music in the park than at, say, an outdoor cafe where they've paid a license to play music there? How about DJing? You bought the records. You bought the turntables. You bought the speakers and brought them out to the park. How is that *not* broadcasting? Is it broadcasting because one person has a business and the other one doesn't? Radio stations here pay APRA fees, which cost more than the restaurant's :-) As do dance clubs. I'll assume your point here is that playing music over your radio that you bought and brought to the park is 'covered' by the fees that the radio station paid in the first place. However, if that's the case, why isn't the shop owner similarly covered? And if the shop owner isn't covered to play the radio in the shop, why is the consumer covered to play the radio in the park? The fee is reasonable and its aim is not to stop the practice but to return royalties to the artists. I don't know the specifics, but I do know that radio stations sent their playlists to APRA, and also that they do spot audits just to try to get an idea of the sors of material being played so that they have a reasonable idea of who should be getting the royalties. Absolutely. I'm *ALL* for people getting their royalties. If you make a film, you either have to not use music at all, make the music yourself, pay someone to score the film for you, have music 'donated' to your project or pay whomever created the music you want to use. It makes perfect sense in that case that since you're not incurring the cost of having your film scored, you should pay whomever you got the copyrighted music from. youtube, you're broadcasting. So the rules are different for making a home movie that once upon a time really was a home movie (ie was only viewed at home by immediate family/friends). Personally I like the licence system as it provides revenue back to copyright holders. I think the license system sounds fair as long as it's proportional to the project's actual budget. The question, however, becomes how BROAD is the CAST? :) What makes a video on YouTube that has 6 views a broadcast? Yes... Technically it's a BROADcast, because people all over the world COULD view it if they wanted to... except they don't. Why should a 6-view video on YouTube be held to a higher standard than a home video that's shown in a local recreation center or church basement or at someone's house over the holidays? Because there was the POTENTIAL for hundreds or thousands or millions of views? That's part of my point. I'm not sure at this point how many millions of people live here in NYC, but I guarantee you the *potential* viewership of a public access show is WAY up there, due to the numbers of people with television and cable accounts. No, people can't watch NYC public access in Japan, but that doesn't make a video blog with relatively no traffic more of a broadcast than that public access show, IMO... Of course, I'm no expert in what IS and ISN'T a broadcast. Related to all this, i know we all would like to use our favourite bands on our videos but if they have copyright, or signed it away, and we don't have a licence ot use it, we can't. ... Because we are BROADcasting? Regardless of how un-watched our videos are or how un-listened-to our podcasts are? The fact that there's the *potential* for millions of computer-owners to view our content makes us broadcasters as opposed to
[videoblogging] Re: Can anybody tell me....
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Miles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: around the 25/10/07 Bill Cammack mentioned about [videoblogging] Re: Can anybody tell me that: I may not have been clear about what I mean by public access stations here in the US. Then again, you may understand what they are. Just in case... The way things work (to grossly generalize, based on my experiences in Manhattan, NYC) is you apply to the station to get a time slot, 30 minutes or an hour. If/when you get your slot, it will either be before or after a certain hour, which determines how risque or vulgar your show can be. You give them the name of your show and the topic. Depending on the topic, your show might ONLY be slated for late-night airings. After that, it's up to you to provide the show to the station. They play whatever's there for your show at the time your show comes up. For this reason, sometimes, they will play the exact same show for three weeks in a row, because nobody went to change it. here the community system is different. the broadcaster is still responsible for content, though like the US system anyone can come and pitch shows/content. It is like editors ot the editor. the editor and the newspaper owner is responsible for what is published even if it is a letter to the editor. I see. There are lots of derivative public access shows, like there are lots of derivative text blogs. You know, the kind that just regurgitate celebrity gossip, for instance. There's nothing of original value from the web site creator, but they get a lot of hits because people want to read about what Britney or Lindsay jacked up THIS week. Somehow, it doesn't matter that nobody involved with that site took ANY of the pictures on that site or know ANYTHING first-hand about the topics they cover. They're putting on a web site what they learned on Entertainment Tonight or in some tabloid they subscribe to. Just like nobody forces sites like that to be original, nobody forces public access shows NOT to be a rehashing of what came on a particular music video channel this week. The point of all this background information is to set up the fact that there isn't anyone screening these videos for content. Because of this, you have some shows that are ENTIRELY music videos ripped from television stations with the television station bug still in the corner (MTV, VH1, BET, whatever). So I'm not even talking about someone using the music in the background of their original content. The only thing original about their show might be them talking in between ripped videos, IF that. The only problem I have with these things is that if you do this to others content you can hardly complain when someone does it to yours. For example on this list there have been numerous examples of third party sites aggregating other people's video without credit, etc. But if in your videos you have been reusing others material without a licence, I think you're in a glass house throwing stones :-) Absolutely. I think this is a major factor for a lot of people... I wouldn't want this to happen to me. Like with that MyHeavy thing. People didn't want their family videos with their children in it flanked by 50-foot (relative to the video itself) chicks in bikinis or bras or whatever and all the other gaudy advertising they had placed around our blip feeds. I think this is a great motivator. If we were The Rolling Stones, we wouldn't want our music to be played without us getting royalties! :O... except we're NOT The Rolling Stones. :) [not that there's anything wrong with that] -- Bill http://billcammack.com Meanwhile, I've been to parties that were COMPLETELY VJed from YouTube. I mean, even that fad going on right now, Rick Rolling points to an actual music video. I'm not interested enough to research who posted that there, but you see the point. There's tons of stuff on YouTube also that has ZERO clearance. yep. welcome to the pointy end of diy media. we are all in the middle of these enormous changes and we can see that google are working rather hard to allay the anxieties of big media while also getting to keep the cake -- cheers Adrian Miles this email is bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private [x] vogmae.net.au [official compliance stuff:] CRICOS provider code: 00122A
[videoblogging] Re: Great article about a videoblog
Thanks Jay and all I am actually very surprised that what was really a small personal project of mine has been acknowledged by so many people in my city and online (Although it was very surreal to see myself in the newspaper boxes of every other corner of philadelphia). What is even better is the many different perspective that people take to it and their reasons for being fond of it. My intentions were artistic ones, for the most part and yet I am happy that it is being viewed for it's social and journalistic elements as well. I really thought that it would never be seen outside of the videoblogging world. I could not have known was how it would be taken by the people who live in my neighborhood and who would most likely have never known about my blog without the local papers writing about it. the feedback from my this offline community has also been very positive. thanks vloggers for supporting me from the beginning. My original intention was only to keep it going for a year. I've decided to keep the project going after the year is up in December. It may not be as regular as i was trying to make it before but i think it is worth further exploration. david --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Kessler from undertheheel.blogspot.com was featured in hos local paper: http://www.philadelphiaweekly.com/view.php?id=15617 It's really well done. *What began *in January as a fascination with the El location has transformed into a series of character studies that are as powerful and compelling as anything out there in the worlds of art or journalism�not just as portals into the everyday struggles of individuals, but also as a portrait of the neighborhood in which they live. Kessler's decision to display his work in the form of a video blog ( undertheel.blogspot.com) was deliberately populist, allowing his work to be experienced by anyone with computer access, while giving it both an immediacy rarely found in art collections and an intimacy rarely seen in journalism. Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Video: http://ryanishungry.com Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/2aodyc RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: RUNtv will pay $50 for non-exclusive use of your videos
Hi everyone: On 10/25/07, johnleeke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Josh: You may consider any of my videos about restoring historic buidings: http://johnleeke.blip.tv/posts/?user=JohnLeeke JoshWhen I resume my show next month on BlogTV (Which I'll repeat on TVUNetworks as well), you can air those videos as many of them will have guests, guest co-hosts, and/or callers. THE PAT COOK SHOW (Video Podcast) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/ Cheers :D -- Pat Cook Denver, Colorado PODCASTS - **NEW VLOG** AS MY WORLD TURNS - http://asmyworldturnstv.blogspot.com/ PAT'S REAL DEAL VIDEO BLOG - http://patsrealdeal.livejournal.com/ PAT'S HEALTH MEDICAL WONDERS VIDEOCAST - http://patshealthmedicalwondersvideocast.blogspot.com/ YOUTUBE CHANNEL - http://www.youtube.com/amwowttv/ THE PAT COOK SHOW - http://www.livevideo.com/thepcshow THE PAT COOK SHOW (Video Podcst) - http://thepctvshow.blogspot.com/ THE PAT COOK SHOW (Audio Podcast) - http://thepcradioshow.blogspot.com/
[videoblogging] Video Blogging in Rural Cambodia ..
Hey folks, In August, I went to Cambodia to do some training and brought over a few video cameras. One of the cameras is being used to document some rural farming techniques. The blogger, a westerner, is hoping to teach the farmers themselves to use the cameras. Check out this first video - it's really good http://www.mandevu.net/2007/10/26/video-from-the-field/ If you feel inclined, leave a comment and encourage him .. -- Beth Kanter Social Media and Nonprofits: Trainer, Coach, and Consultant Beth's Blog: http://beth.typepad.com Beth's Wiki: http://bethkanter.wikispaces.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
