[videoblogging] Anyone tried YouTube video ads?
Hello, Has anyone tried YouTube video ads? There seems to be 2 kinds... - http://www.youtube.com/advertise#videoads - http://www.youtube.com/advertise#invideoads Any one has any experience with these? What kind of targeting is available with these? What's the paying scheme? CPM? CPT? CPC? CPA? Something else? Is there a way to allow the user click on the video and send them to a page you define? (I.e., can you set up your own landing page?) See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/
[videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
I don't think file *size* is as important as data rate. Like Verdi's saying, you want people to be able to view your videos without them constantly stopping to buffer. The better quality you can get at lower data rates, the more likely you are for people to watch your show and not get frustrated and eject. Therefore, the *size* of the file would depend on the length of your program. Bill http://BillCammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let me see if I can give you a useful answer... In the US, at least at the moment, most people have broadband connections without monthly dowmload limits. So the size of the file is less of a concern especially if people are using aggregators like iTunes or Miro to download video. Where it becomes a concern is when they are trying to watch it on your website. Those export for IPod 1600kbps videos don't often play without a significant amount of waiting. To make up for that (and plugin uncertainty) many people offer a lower bit rate flash version from blip or youtube. Outside the US many broadband connections come with a monthly download cap (maybe 10GB ?? I'm unsure). Anything downloaded over that limit incurs an extra charge. TimeWarner is now experimenting with a service like this in Texas. Of course there is still a large section of the world that don't have broadband connections at all. So, should you quit making big videos? Probably not. Should you give people options? Sure! That's reason #63 why I like vPIP - you can give visitors to your site a range of choices for viewing and subscribing to you videos. - Verdi On 2/4/08, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unless you only care about rich people in large urban metro areas, then yes, file sizes do matter. - Andreas Den 04.02.2008 kl. 09:44 skrev Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I was just curious what people thought about the file sizes of their video's or the video's that they subscribe too, download, etc. Do you look at the file size often, does it matter if it's big or not? by big I say over 50 mb. I know some of the size of your video file is dependent on how long your video is, but as we as vloggers start making longer and bigger projects, larger and larger file sizes are going to be a natural by product right? I mean using the Ipod settings at 640X480 in itself can still create a rather large file depending on the length of the video. It seemed in the begining, shorter and smaller was better, but is that changing at all? I mean with the push towards HD, with being able to view content on the TV, etc, it just seems like its all a part of the evolution...or is it? I was just curious as to what you all thought. Heath personal http://batmangeek.com professional http://heathparks.com -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen http://www.solitude.dk/ -- http://michaelverdi.com http://freevlog.org http://nscape.tv
[videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
that is the trick though, finding the right data rate, now for Macs there are all kinds of good advice on that but for PC'sit's hard to findit's something I am playing with a lot right now, trying to find a good data rate and size for PC's. I have for a while been exporting as an avi out of vegas then using Quicktime pro to export to Ipod, but I started to notice some interesting things about that process on a few of my more involved videos, long transistions, ovlays, etcwhat I noticed is, that the avi file that was coming out of vegas did not look as crisp when playing in quicktime and that was affecting the encoding to mp4, I was getting a LOT of artifact movement, and I mean a lot, it was unwatchable...so I have been playing around a lottrying to see what settings work the best... I'm also looking at what size 320x240, 640x480, and that widescreen setting recomended by Ryanne, I am messing around with all these trying to see what looks good onsite...and what is good to view on an Ipod, etc... For me, it was always, just set it and forget it kinda, I would just do it and if it looke good, great, if it looked ok, that was great too...but I am finding as I do more and more, that I want it to look as good as it can and in that, it's taking some time for me to get the right set of paramaters to achive that. That was one of the reasons for asking, Cause I have been thinking do I create a really nice version, maybe a little bigger in file size than normal to view onsite with faststart, etc and then in conjunction with what other options do I offerI've just been thinking a lot about all this is all Good points about lengths, and stuff have been brought up, but like I said to Verdi, what I think I am really interested in how people are watching vids, onstite of off...fun stuff, no? ;) Heath professional http://heathparks.com personal http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Bill Cammack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think file *size* is as important as data rate. Like Verdi's saying, you want people to be able to view your videos without them constantly stopping to buffer. The better quality you can get at lower data rates, the more likely you are for people to watch your show and not get frustrated and eject. Therefore, the *size* of the file would depend on the length of your program. Bill http://BillCammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi michaelverdi@ wrote: Let me see if I can give you a useful answer... In the US, at least at the moment, most people have broadband connections without monthly dowmload limits. So the size of the file is less of a concern especially if people are using aggregators like iTunes or Miro to download video. Where it becomes a concern is when they are trying to watch it on your website. Those export for IPod 1600kbps videos don't often play without a significant amount of waiting. To make up for that (and plugin uncertainty) many people offer a lower bit rate flash version from blip or youtube. Outside the US many broadband connections come with a monthly download cap (maybe 10GB ?? I'm unsure). Anything downloaded over that limit incurs an extra charge. TimeWarner is now experimenting with a service like this in Texas. Of course there is still a large section of the world that don't have broadband connections at all. So, should you quit making big videos? Probably not. Should you give people options? Sure! That's reason #63 why I like vPIP - you can give visitors to your site a range of choices for viewing and subscribing to you videos. - Verdi On 2/4/08, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen solitude@ wrote: Unless you only care about rich people in large urban metro areas, then yes, file sizes do matter. - Andreas Den 04.02.2008 kl. 09:44 skrev Heath heathparks@: I was just curious what people thought about the file sizes of their video's or the video's that they subscribe too, download, etc. Do you look at the file size often, does it matter if it's big or not? by big I say over 50 mb. I know some of the size of your video file is dependent on how long your video is, but as we as vloggers start making longer and bigger projects, larger and larger file sizes are going to be a natural by product right? I mean using the Ipod settings at 640X480 in itself can still create a rather large file depending on the length of the video. It seemed in the begining, shorter and smaller was better, but is that changing at all? I mean with the push towards HD, with being able to view content on the TV, etc, it just seems like its all a part of the evolution...or is it? I was just curious as to what you all thought. Heath personal http://batmangeek.com professional http://heathparks.com
[videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
Well the data rate settings should be the same on Windows as on OS X. The problem is if your video editing package doesnt have the right encoder built in, and you have to go to an intermediate format that is then loaded into an encoder. Ther are potential problems where either quality is lost at this step due to the settings codec user for the intermediate format, or if your encoding software makes a bad job of reading that file. You know this already, Im just reiterating. So what format avi are you getting out of vegas? For anybody looking for absolute best possible quality, quicktime is not the best h264 encoder. With the right settings, x264 (which may also be referred to as ffmpeg or mencoder) is probably the best, but working out the right settings, getting the right app that uses this encoder and makes things easy, are issues. The best quality is also not usually the most compatible. I presume the 720p sample that I linked to yesterday, wont play using quciktime, itunes or on various apple hardware. It probably uses h264 High profile, which has various extra encoding features which can give better quality at a given bitrate, at the expense of compatibility. The h264 playback in latest flash will handle this profile, as will certain games consoles and alternative h264 decoders for WIndows Mac. But I assume the lack of quicktime etc compatibility will be enough to put people off? I shall be persuing this anyway, as filesize quality are important to people, and I still consume most video through the browser. Pants, it seems that Adobe managed to break the benefits to cpu load that their hardware fullscreen mode offered. In the beta version I got noticable drop of CPU when using fullscreen mode, and Im not getting the same benefit with the release version. There are some grumblings about this on the net, but Ive not seen anything totally conclusive yet. Right now I am looking to find the best settings to create 960x540 h264 video with hopefully the best possible balance between bitrate, resolution, and compression artifacts. I will post some findings later. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: that is the trick though, finding the right data rate, now for Macs there are all kinds of good advice on that but for PC'sit's hard to findit's something I am playing with a lot right now, trying to find a good data rate and size for PC's. I have for a while been exporting as an avi out of vegas then using Quicktime pro to export to Ipod, but I started to notice some interesting things about that process on a few of my more involved videos, long transistions, ovlays, etcwhat I noticed is, that the avi file that was coming out of vegas did not look as crisp when playing in quicktime and that was affecting the encoding to mp4, I was getting a LOT of artifact movement, and I mean a lot, it was unwatchable...so I have been playing around a lottrying to see what settings work the best... I'm also looking at what size 320x240, 640x480, and that widescreen setting recomended by Ryanne, I am messing around with all these trying to see what looks good onsite...and what is good to view on an Ipod, etc... For me, it was always, just set it and forget it kinda, I would just do it and if it looke good, great, if it looked ok, that was great too...but I am finding as I do more and more, that I want it to look as good as it can and in that, it's taking some time for me to get the right set of paramaters to achive that. That was one of the reasons for asking, Cause I have been thinking do I create a really nice version, maybe a little bigger in file size than normal to view onsite with faststart, etc and then in conjunction with what other options do I offerI've just been thinking a lot about all this is all Good points about lengths, and stuff have been brought up, but like I said to Verdi, what I think I am really interested in how people are watching vids, onstite of off...fun stuff, no? ;) Heath professional http://heathparks.com personal http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Bill Cammack billcammack@ wrote: I don't think file *size* is as important as data rate. Like Verdi's saying, you want people to be able to view your videos without them constantly stopping to buffer. The better quality you can get at lower data rates, the more likely you are for people to watch your show and not get frustrated and eject. Therefore, the *size* of the file would depend on the length of your program. Bill http://BillCammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi michaelverdi@ wrote: Let me see if I can give you a useful answer... In the US, at least at the moment, most people have broadband connections without monthly dowmload limits. So the size of
[videoblogging] Re: Plugin for Video Comments
Yeah I think you are right. I love simplicity but seem bad at achieving it myself. Im trying through, have put ideas about needing a new fancy flash player to power this stuff, to one side for now, JW FLV player is good enough for a start, and Im getting way ahead of myself. For prototyping how the comments/conversations may be presented, we could just use a multi-user CMS such as drupal, and just pretend its not a single site. However Ive melted my mind by trying to read the list of every drupal module thats available for v5. Lots of different comment modules to ponder. So going back to basics, how exactly are people thinking that comments from multiple sites, or video responses or whatever, would be presented visually? Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Meiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it would need someone who can develop it to do a protype of the idea in it's most simple form, a proof of concept. -Mike On Feb 4, 2008 11:42 AM, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wouldnt say it is that easy, a really intuitive system will need more thought in this area than we normally see. Sure, at its most basic its not that hard, but Id sure like to see some attempts to experiment more with how multiple videos are presented visually, see if there is room to bring a lot more fun ease to this realm. As well as plugins that would work with wordpress or whatever, Id really like to see an opensource flash video player that had this sort of stuff built into it, plus the best of features offered by sites/services like blip, youtube etc. Its a shame my flash skills are pretty bad, Id really like to help do working mockup of this stuff, but right now Id probably have to do it in mac-only quartz composer, or wmv-only silverlight, unless I can find the cash time to understand actionsript in flash better. Im not totally sure it makes sense to combine thse wishes with the stuff you are talking about, dont want to overcomplicate the mission, but it could be an opportunity to fill a few other gaps in the 'what wecan do without 3rd party hosted services' department. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Mike Meiser groups-yahoo-com@ wrote: thumbnails, embeded videos, visual presentation, that' the easy part jay. It occurs to me I have never put my CSS skills to work in this space... it's way past time I actually put my css skills to work. The big issue is this would require some significant DB work and some good programing. As I said this is nothing that hasn't already been demonstrated through vlogdir, show in the box and other projects in this space. Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
Yes,decent source footage is vital, but its easy to throw away that advantage with poor choice of final encoding settings. The more I watch that video, the more I see areas that would have benefitted from a higher bitrate. The nature of the footage also lends itself to tolerating low-bitrate better, theres a lot of stuff that isnt moving much. So unfortunately I conclude that that sample offers a better res/bitrate balance than most are likely to achieve in practice. Im still worried about te high cpu use when playing 720p footage as well. As mentioned in previous email, I am going to experiment (again) with moving the resolution down a notch to 960x540 and see what can be done. I still have no idea when we will see h264 played using flash, become a widely used option, I guess I do expect it to happen sometime in 2008. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rambos Locker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve, the quality at that size is incredible. I've played around with Divx in SD footage and got my best results, but nothing like that. Outputting the best quality from the Cam still seems to be the key to stunning video. Cheers Rambo HYPERLINK http://rambos-locker.blogspot.comhttp://rambos-locker.blogspot.com -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2008 10:44 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore? I have been inspired by this video: HYPERLINK http://www.flashvideofactory.com/test/DEMO720_Heima_H264_500K.htmlhttp ://www.flashvid-eofactory.-com/test/-DEMO720_Heima_-H264_500K.-html So that video is 1280x720 25fps but the bitrate is only 500K :) So that video which is naerly 4 minutes long, is only 15.5MB in size, but 720p resolution :) In not sure which encoder settings he used. Granted it is possible to see various compression artifacts here and there, as the bitrate is much lower than would be recommended for such resolutions, but even so, Im very impressed. Other issues such as playback performance on slower machines could be an issue, but ooh nonetheless :) Cheers Steve Elbows --- In HYPERLINK mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com[EMAIL PROTECTED], Michael Verdi michaelverdi@ wrote: On Feb 4, 2008 5:14 PM, Heath heathparks@ wrote: But this does lead to another question, how many people are watching the videos on site and how many download and watch on their portable? Anybody know of any studies on that? Good question. I think the vast majority of people are probably watching things on the web. Just on my own site it probably averages out to about 7 of 10 people watching on the site. And I think I have a pretty heavily videoblogger skewed bunch of people watching. - Verdi No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.20/1259 - Release Date: 4/02/2008 8:42 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.20/1259 - Release Date: 4/02/2008 8:42 PM [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes,decent source footage is vital, but its easy to throw away that advantage with poor choice of final encoding settings. Absolutely. People don't understand that compression is as much of an art as filming or editing. They also don't understand that sometimes you have to shoot with your final output format in mind, which means tighter shots, better light and less movement if you're compresing to iPod size for instance. Bill http://BillCammack.com The more I watch that video, the more I see areas that would have benefitted from a higher bitrate. The nature of the footage also lends itself to tolerating low-bitrate better, theres a lot of stuff that isnt moving much. So unfortunately I conclude that that sample offers a better res/bitrate balance than most are likely to achieve in practice. Im still worried about te high cpu use when playing 720p footage as well. As mentioned in previous email, I am going to experiment (again) with moving the resolution down a notch to 960x540 and see what can be done. I still have no idea when we will see h264 played using flash, become a widely used option, I guess I do expect it to happen sometime in 2008. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rambos Locker rambos_locker@ wrote: Steve, the quality at that size is incredible. I've played around with Divx in SD footage and got my best results, but nothing like that. Outputting the best quality from the Cam still seems to be the key to stunning video. Cheers Rambo HYPERLINK http://rambos-locker.blogspot.comhttp://rambos-locker.blogspot.com -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2008 10:44 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore? I have been inspired by this video: HYPERLINK http://www.flashvideofactory.com/test/DEMO720_Heima_H264_500K.htmlhttp ://www.flashvid-eofactory.-com/test/-DEMO720_Heima_-H264_500K.-html So that video is 1280x720 25fps but the bitrate is only 500K :) So that video which is naerly 4 minutes long, is only 15.5MB in size, but 720p resolution :) In not sure which encoder settings he used. Granted it is possible to see various compression artifacts here and there, as the bitrate is much lower than would be recommended for such resolutions, but even so, Im very impressed. Other issues such as playback performance on slower machines could be an issue, but ooh nonetheless :) Cheers Steve Elbows --- In HYPERLINK mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging@, Michael Verdi michaelverdi@ wrote: On Feb 4, 2008 5:14 PM, Heath heathparks@ wrote: But this does lead to another question, how many people are watching the videos on site and how many download and watch on their portable? Anybody know of any studies on that? Good question. I think the vast majority of people are probably watching things on the web. Just on my own site it probably averages out to about 7 of 10 people watching on the site. And I think I have a pretty heavily videoblogger skewed bunch of people watching. - Verdi No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.20/1259 - Release Date: 4/02/2008 8:42 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.20/1259 - Release Date: 4/02/2008 8:42 PM [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Plugin for Video Comments
I've been thinking about what Charles said. In theory we could extend wordpress' trackback mechanism. I'm not sure exactly how it currently works, but we could basically just extend it to identify video enclosures and embed those in the original blog post comments area. This might be THE simplest form of encouraging cross blogging. The next step would then be to make wordpress' comments RSS support enclosures. I'm not by any means an expert on Wordpress' trackback mechanisms but these should theoretically be two very practical steps that would encourage not just leaving videos in comments, but also re-vlogging your responses. I don't think these replace the need for a good video conversation tracker, but they're certainly very pragmatic / accomplishable first steps that would immediately enliven vlogging. It occurs to me that perhaps in the future a little CSS style work might be helpful in wordpress as well. Perhaps thee so called 'video responses should be brought up along side the original video (like on youtube), so they're more visible. This would involve pulling additional content such as thumbnails from trackbacks as well. Anyway, I like this idea, it's far more practical then then having a 3rd party tracker, and even better fits much better into the SIAB project schema. Let's keep talking about it. Maybe we can get to the point where we can identify and work out some of the issues, do a little research, spec out and design some concepts. Even if this is something that SIAB devides not to pursue I'd find the process worthwhile and perhaps it would lead to other things. So... does anyone know any practical reasons why we cannot expand on trackbacks to identify videos and embed them in the comments on the original post? -Mike mmeiser.com/blog On 2/4/08, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would be nice if, for example, each WordPress (or Show in a Box) based video blog had a plugin that could show the entire threaded convo itself. That way you could see the convo no matter which video blog you were on. -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 4, 2008 3:58 AM, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So Jay, is this an offer to develop it? I would be very happy to contribute feedback, design, CSS, light coding / anything I can just as long as it's either a) open source, or b) I have some stake in the entity building it. I'm just sick of helping unappreciative companies / people build things that profit them and not giving anything back. The succubus is a good metaphor. yeah, lets not worry about creating a business. go into porn or the new Blackwater-style security services to make money. The primary requirements of such a system is users will be able to add RSS 2.0 / mediaRSS feeds with videos in them... it will also need to regularly crawl and DB these feeds and identify permalinks in the posts cross referencing other posts. Take a moment to check out Andreas writings on tracking conversations. He recently reminded me of his work back in 2004(!). Not sure if I was ready to grasp his ideas back then. http://www.solitude.dk/tag/conversation+tracking my experience and desire for any system screams for a visual presentation. a list of links doesnt excite me. I want to see thumbnails. i want to watch videos i the page easily. i want the page to make the videos look good. Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Professional: http://ryanishungry.com Personal: http://momentshowing.net Photos: http://flickr.com/photos/jaydedman/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/jaydedman RSS: http://tinyurl.com/yqgdt9 Yahoo! Groups Links
[videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
Excatly Bill, dead on, the more movement you have and the lighting is key. That is where I noticed it, when I did a 'music video' of my driving around, a lot of footage was shot was I was driving at a fairly high speed (50 mph) with the trees flowing by, etc at the recomended file settings, that I used normaly it just looked like crap, lot's of artifacts and bleed though, so you are absolutely right, we need to think about things like that while filming or be aware that we may have to up the bit rate or file size to compensate. Steve - for Vegas it uses Sorrensan Squeeze for Quciktime, not sure what it's using to create the avi file, all I know, is that in Windows the avi looks fantastic, but when I run it through quicktime it's not near as good. If I use a .mov file, it looks better, Vegas is really good at lot of things and I like it a lot, just need to spend more time playing around with it. Heath professional http://heathparks.com personal http://batmangeek.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Bill Cammack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins steve@ wrote: Yes,decent source footage is vital, but its easy to throw away that advantage with poor choice of final encoding settings. Absolutely. People don't understand that compression is as much of an art as filming or editing. They also don't understand that sometimes you have to shoot with your final output format in mind, which means tighter shots, better light and less movement if you're compresing to iPod size for instance. Bill http://BillCammack.com The more I watch that video, the more I see areas that would have benefitted from a higher bitrate. The nature of the footage also lends itself to tolerating low-bitrate better, theres a lot of stuff that isnt moving much. So unfortunately I conclude that that sample offers a better res/bitrate balance than most are likely to achieve in practice. Im still worried about te high cpu use when playing 720p footage as well. As mentioned in previous email, I am going to experiment (again) with moving the resolution down a notch to 960x540 and see what can be done. I still have no idea when we will see h264 played using flash, become a widely used option, I guess I do expect it to happen sometime in 2008. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rambos Locker rambos_locker@ wrote: Steve, the quality at that size is incredible. I've played around with Divx in SD footage and got my best results, but nothing like that. Outputting the best quality from the Cam still seems to be the key to stunning video. Cheers Rambo HYPERLINK http://rambos-locker.blogspot.comhttp://rambos- locker.blogspot.com -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Watkins Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2008 10:44 AM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore? I have been inspired by this video: HYPERLINK http://www.flashvideofactory.com/test/DEMO720_Heima_H264_500K.html; http ://www.flashvid-eofactory.-com/test/-DEMO720_Heima_-H264_500K.- html So that video is 1280x720 25fps but the bitrate is only 500K :) So that video which is naerly 4 minutes long, is only 15.5MB in size, but 720p resolution :) In not sure which encoder settings he used. Granted it is possible to see various compression artifacts here and there, as the bitrate is much lower than would be recommended for such resolutions, but even so, Im very impressed. Other issues such as playback performance on slower machines could be an issue, but ooh nonetheless :) Cheers Steve Elbows --- In HYPERLINK mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.comvideoblogging@, Michael Verdi michaelverdi@ wrote: On Feb 4, 2008 5:14 PM, Heath heathparks@ wrote: But this does lead to another question, how many people are watching the videos on site and how many download and watch on their portable? Anybody know of any studies on that? Good question. I think the vast majority of people are probably watching things on the web. Just on my own site it probably averages out to about 7 of 10 people watching on the site. And I think I have a pretty heavily videoblogger skewed bunch of people watching. - Verdi No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.20/1259 - Release Date: 4/02/2008 8:42 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.20/1259 - Release Date: 4/02/2008 8:42 PM [Non-text portions of this message
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Plugin for Video Comments
You know. I remember reading somewhere that, when the HTTP protocol (that the web is build upon) was being designed, they actually wanted a include a mechanism to keep track of what other pages were linking to you. If I recall correctly, the HTTP Referer and yes you're suppose to mis-spell referrer as referer in this context... was a much much weaker form of this concept. (I guess they ran out of time to do it properly.) There's a handful of protocols for handling this... TrackBack http://www.sixapart.com/pronet/docs/trackback_spec Pingback http://www.hixie.ch/specs/pingback/pingback There's also something called Refback... but I couldn't find a spec for it. In general, people seem to call this concept Linkbacks although sometime people seem to just use TrackBack and Pingback as a generic term too (that is synonymous with Linkback.) See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 5, 2008 8:34 AM, Mike Meiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been thinking about what Charles said. In theory we could extend wordpress' trackback mechanism. I'm not sure exactly how it currently works, but we could basically just extend it to identify video enclosures and embed those in the original blog post comments area. This might be THE simplest form of encouraging cross blogging. The next step would then be to make wordpress' comments RSS support enclosures. I'm not by any means an expert on Wordpress' trackback mechanisms but these should theoretically be two very practical steps that would encourage not just leaving videos in comments, but also re-vlogging your responses. I don't think these replace the need for a good video conversation tracker, but they're certainly very pragmatic / accomplishable first steps that would immediately enliven vlogging. It occurs to me that perhaps in the future a little CSS style work might be helpful in wordpress as well. Perhaps thee so called 'video responses should be brought up along side the original video (like on youtube), so they're more visible. This would involve pulling additional content such as thumbnails from trackbacks as well. Anyway, I like this idea, it's far more practical then then having a 3rd party tracker, and even better fits much better into the SIAB project schema. Let's keep talking about it. Maybe we can get to the point where we can identify and work out some of the issues, do a little research, spec out and design some concepts. Even if this is something that SIAB devides not to pursue I'd find the process worthwhile and perhaps it would lead to other things. So... does anyone know any practical reasons why we cannot expand on trackbacks to identify videos and embed them in the comments on the original post? -Mike mmeiser.com/blog On 2/4/08, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would be nice if, for example, each WordPress (or Show in a Box) based video blog had a plugin that could show the entire threaded convo itself. That way you could see the convo no matter which video blog you were on. -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 4, 2008 3:58 AM, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So Jay, is this an offer to develop it? I would be very happy to contribute feedback, design, CSS, light coding / anything I can just as long as it's either a) open source, or b) I have some stake in the entity building it. I'm just sick of helping unappreciative companies / people build things that profit them and not giving anything back. The succubus is a good metaphor. yeah, lets not worry about creating a business. go into porn or the new Blackwater-style security services to make money. The primary requirements of such a system is users will be able to add RSS 2.0 / mediaRSS feeds with videos in them... it will also need to regularly crawl and DB these feeds and identify permalinks in the posts cross referencing other posts. Take a moment to check out Andreas writings on tracking conversations. He recently reminded me of his work back in 2004(!). Not sure if I was ready to grasp his ideas back then. http://www.solitude.dk/tag/conversation+tracking my experience and desire for any system screams for a visual presentation. a list of links doesnt excite me. I want to see thumbnails. i want to watch videos i the page easily. i want the page to make the videos look good. Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Professional: http://ryanishungry.com Personal: http://momentshowing.net Photos:
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Plugin for Video Comments
Rather than extending the TrackBack or Pingback protocols, perhaps we could support the marking of the video (and being the content... and thus the thing being a video comment) with some Semantic HTML. I.e., using HTML classes, special HTML elements, and HTML rel and rev attributes to express meaning. Maybe something like... cite a rev=comment href=http://example.com/what_i_am_commenting_to;.../a embed class=comment src=.../embed /cite or... cite a rev=comment href=http://example.com/what_i_am_commenting_to;.../a a rel=enclosure class=comment href=... type=video/...img class=thumbnail src=thumbnail.jpg //a /cite ... Depending on how you're putting your video into your webpage. (I.e., embeding it or linking to it.) (Obviously we should think about the HTML constructs a little more. And see what people are already doing and accommodate them... rather than try to dictate to everyone what they have to do.) From a Show in the Box (and WordPress) point-of-view... for each of your Linkbacks... you'd just need to go parse the HTML block that was said to link to you... and look for Semantic HTML markup that would indicate a video comment. -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 5, 2008 8:55 AM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You know. I remember reading somewhere that, when the HTTP protocol (that the web is build upon) was being designed, they actually wanted a include a mechanism to keep track of what other pages were linking to you. If I recall correctly, the HTTP Referer and yes you're suppose to mis-spell referrer as referer in this context... was a much much weaker form of this concept. (I guess they ran out of time to do it properly.) There's a handful of protocols for handling this... TrackBack http://www.sixapart.com/pronet/docs/trackback_spec Pingback http://www.hixie.ch/specs/pingback/pingback There's also something called Refback... but I couldn't find a spec for it. In general, people seem to call this concept Linkbacks although sometime people seem to just use TrackBack and Pingback as a generic term too (that is synonymous with Linkback.) See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 5, 2008 8:34 AM, Mike Meiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been thinking about what Charles said. In theory we could extend wordpress' trackback mechanism. I'm not sure exactly how it currently works, but we could basically just extend it to identify video enclosures and embed those in the original blog post comments area. This might be THE simplest form of encouraging cross blogging. The next step would then be to make wordpress' comments RSS support enclosures. I'm not by any means an expert on Wordpress' trackback mechanisms but these should theoretically be two very practical steps that would encourage not just leaving videos in comments, but also re-vlogging your responses. I don't think these replace the need for a good video conversation tracker, but they're certainly very pragmatic / accomplishable first steps that would immediately enliven vlogging. It occurs to me that perhaps in the future a little CSS style work might be helpful in wordpress as well. Perhaps thee so called 'video responses should be brought up along side the original video (like on youtube), so they're more visible. This would involve pulling additional content such as thumbnails from trackbacks as well. Anyway, I like this idea, it's far more practical then then having a 3rd party tracker, and even better fits much better into the SIAB project schema. Let's keep talking about it. Maybe we can get to the point where we can identify and work out some of the issues, do a little research, spec out and design some concepts. Even if this is something that SIAB devides not to pursue I'd find the process worthwhile and perhaps it would lead to other things. So... does anyone know any practical reasons why we cannot expand on trackbacks to identify videos and embed them in the comments on the original post? -Mike mmeiser.com/blog On 2/4/08, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would be nice if, for example, each WordPress (or Show in a Box) based video blog had a plugin that could show the entire threaded convo itself. That way you could see the convo no matter which video blog you were on. -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 4, 2008 3:58 AM, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[videoblogging] Re: TrafficGeyser.com ?
The SEO value of TubeMogul or TrafficGeyser is that you can IMMEDIATELY get your video ranked highly in a search, even on highly competitive search terms. And with many sites, you can link your profile page and/or keywords back to your site, so you also boost your own page. Let's assume everyone on this list is focused on creating great videos - more than just traffic, they want repeat viewers. Getting your videos to multiple sharing sites will get more first time viewers... assuming they like what they see, you will have more repeat viewers. Distribution is promotion and drives more views. Jake had a great list of tips for improving the SEO of your site. When you're distributing your video widely, it follows that you should max out the keyword and description boxes for each site, have a catchy and relevant title, and choose the appropriate category. Most producers will want to drive people back to their site by putting it in the profile or description, watermarking their videos, or some mention of their own domain in the video. What's interesting is that when you distribute your video to multiple sites, when you do a search that contains your title, description, or keywords, for one video your highest result might be Dailymotion, another video might be Metacafe, another might be YouTube... even when your search is through Google, you can find your highest results through other sites. In short, using a service to distribute your videos can be a great tool for all types of video creators. TrafficGeyser is one, and TubeMogul is another - the difference being that TubeMogul provides a picture of where your views and comments are coming from after you've published your vids to the different sites. I'm actually interested in hearing anyone's experience with TrafficGeyser, too. Best, Mark Rotblat [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.tubemogul.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Richard Amirault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Jake Ludington (snip) The big secret for video bloggers who want to rank well in Google is you need to be willing to write text - Google is still a text based search engine. If you can't be bothered to write something descriptive, you will languish in search engine obscurity. My experience with Google is that it does not matter what text you have on your site .. if no one is linked to your site Google will not list your site in ANY position. The more folks who link to your site the higher you will rank. Richard Amirault Boston, MA, USA http://n1jdu.org http://bostonfandom.org http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7hf9u2ZdlQ
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Plugin for Video Comments
Actually I just remembered that I solved a problem similar to this when I was writing the VideoPress Video Embed plugin. The VideoPress Video Embed plugin provide code other people can use to embed your video on other people's pages. The thing is, I marked that embed code semantically with a videoembed class, so that videos could be embedded in an automated fashion. For example texarea class=videoembed...the embed code.../textarea or... div class=videoembed...the embed code.../div (This should be able to be easily added to vPIP's embed code system.) So... for a video comment... you could just look at the page that hit you with a pingback or trackback... and look for an HTML element with class=videoembed on it... and then #1 know that that page is/has a video... and #2 know how to put/embed that video on your page. Of course... with embedding... you'll have to be careful with what you allow to be embedded. But that's just a detail. (For example, you might want to not allow script tags or style tags, but allow embed and object or whatever.) See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 5, 2008 9:09 AM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rather than extending the TrackBack or Pingback protocols, perhaps we could support the marking of the video (and being the content... and thus the thing being a video comment) with some Semantic HTML. I.e., using HTML classes, special HTML elements, and HTML rel and rev attributes to express meaning. Maybe something like... cite a rev=comment href=http://example.com/what_i_am_commenting_to;.../a embed class=comment src=.../embed /cite or... cite a rev=comment href=http://example.com/what_i_am_commenting_to;.../a a rel=enclosure class=comment href=... type=video/...img class=thumbnail src=thumbnail.jpg //a /cite ... Depending on how you're putting your video into your webpage. (I.e., embeding it or linking to it.) (Obviously we should think about the HTML constructs a little more. And see what people are already doing and accommodate them... rather than try to dictate to everyone what they have to do.) From a Show in the Box (and WordPress) point-of-view... for each of your Linkbacks... you'd just need to go parse the HTML block that was said to link to you... and look for Semantic HTML markup that would indicate a video comment. -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 5, 2008 8:55 AM, Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You know. I remember reading somewhere that, when the HTTP protocol (that the web is build upon) was being designed, they actually wanted a include a mechanism to keep track of what other pages were linking to you. If I recall correctly, the HTTP Referer and yes you're suppose to mis-spell referrer as referer in this context... was a much much weaker form of this concept. (I guess they ran out of time to do it properly.) There's a handful of protocols for handling this... TrackBack http://www.sixapart.com/pronet/docs/trackback_spec Pingback http://www.hixie.ch/specs/pingback/pingback There's also something called Refback... but I couldn't find a spec for it. In general, people seem to call this concept Linkbacks although sometime people seem to just use TrackBack and Pingback as a generic term too (that is synonymous with Linkback.) See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 5, 2008 8:34 AM, Mike Meiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been thinking about what Charles said. In theory we could extend wordpress' trackback mechanism. I'm not sure exactly how it currently works, but we could basically just extend it to identify video enclosures and embed those in the original blog post comments area. This might be THE simplest form of encouraging cross blogging. The next step would then be to make wordpress' comments RSS support enclosures. I'm not by any means an expert on Wordpress' trackback mechanisms but these should theoretically be two very practical steps that would encourage not just leaving videos in comments, but also re-vlogging your responses. I don't think these replace the need for a good video conversation tracker, but they're certainly very pragmatic / accomplishable first steps that would immediately enliven vlogging. It occurs to me that perhaps in the future a little CSS style work might be helpful in wordpress as well. Perhaps thee so called 'video responses should be brought up
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Plugin for Video Comments
Charles, Regarding semantic markup... Indeed. That's why i made mention of XFN earlier to imply that taking the same concepts of people relations through semantics (my profiles and friends profiles and discovering connections), the same should be applied to the conversations being had among these people. If you are posting a response to another post (barring trackback/pingback/linkback), making use of semantic markup can build the graph that can be mapped out and presented logically. a simple rel or rev with url to the permalink and/or media file along with other sensible extensions is how this thing should sprout I've thought a little on what structure can be applied. When thinking about media pooling, such as the Semanal video pool its not truly about commenting, replying and responding. its about contributing and participating. But a contributed video to Semanal can also be a response to another video. So it might make sense to focus on multiple methods and means to interconnecting media and people in ways that can be trailed via web services and plugins to common platforms such as WP, Drupal etc. As far as output... how it all would look and feel. that's maybe a bit moot in the beginning stages because once the groundwork is in place, then developers and designers can have infinite ways to present the relationships and content. I think MIke pointed that out earleir in this thread or somewhere. It's all challenging and definately the look and feel discussion is important and should be happening concurrently... with people doing mockups and prototypes. But some level of samepageism needs to be set. sull
Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20 Camera Noise
I use little Sony earbuds and I haven't experienced any delay. Maybe try messing around with the AT and wind cut options? Not sure. On Feb 5, 2008 1:10 PM, Christopher Polack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone experienced an audio delay while using headphones with the HV20? I've tried it both with and with out my AT Mic and I hear a delay. On the tape it's fine. Any thoughts? Topher Polack 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] Conversation Tracking (was: Plugin for Video Comments)
I like the use of cite and rev/rel -- it's meaning that's already defined. cite a rel=enclosure class=comment href=... type=video/...img class=thumbnail src=thumbnail.jpg //a In Response to: a rev=comment href=http://example.com/what_i_am_commenting_to;.../a /cite Seems to say it all. Doesn't it? I'm not sure what all the talk about charts and graphs are all about ... I personally don't imagine ever using such an interface (I could be wrong) .. but I would love a way to list (at my post's permalink) video responses to my videos that people publish on their sites. Doesn't the above describe that pretty accurately? Sounds like what we need is a) a plugin that scans trackback urls for rev=comment and picks up any rel=enclosure type=video links within the same cite block ?? -- said plugin could then easily save for this trackback comment the same video comment fields that my recent plugin does for regular comments display them appropriately. (Other bigger/better plugins could use the same stored fields to display the video comments in all sorts of fabulous ways) b) a simple way to let you post a video response on your site to a video elsewhere -- what would be cool is a bookmarklet you can click in your browser while at someones post that sends you to your blogs write post page with the framework of the above syntax already completed. Just plugin your url to your video and your thumbnail and presto. (such plugin in of urls could be done in some whiz bang web2.0 way of course) - Dave -- http://www.DavidMeade.com
Re: [videoblogging] Photoshop hints for Flickr newbie
If you're using Flickr why not just let flickr resize them? -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 5, 2008 11:38 AM, John Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A bit off the vlogger topic but somewhat related so thanks in advance for any help. I've got over 30 years of print photos that I want to start storing on Flikr. I'm scanning them into Photoshop (7/CS) and resizing them to a width of 600 pixels which works well on my blog, then Save for Web. Anyone have a better 2 cents worth? Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com __ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: [videoblogging] Photoshop hints for Flickr newbie
Thanks Charles, I'll start there and see what happens. JC --- Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you're using Flickr why not just let flickr resize them? -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 5, 2008 11:38 AM, John Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A bit off the vlogger topic but somewhat related so thanks in advance for any help. I've got over 30 years of print photos that I want to start storing on Flikr. I'm scanning them into Photoshop (7/CS) and resizing them to a width of 600 pixels which works well on my blog, then Save for Web. Anyone have a better 2 cents worth? Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com __ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [videoblogging] Conversation Tracking (was: Plugin for Video Comments)
comments below On Feb 5, 2008 1:33 PM, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I like the use of cite and rev/rel -- it's meaning that's already defined. cite a rel=enclosure class=comment href=... type=video/...img class=thumbnail src=thumbnail.jpg //a In Response to: a rev=comment href=http://example.com/what_i_am_commenting_to;.../a /cite Seems to say it all. Doesn't it? I have no problem with rel=cite as an evolving standard... but most people don't use it yet and there's no reason we need to stick strictly to links using rel=cite. Anyway, it's irrelevant if we're using trackbacks. I assume trackbacks have their own mechanism. I'm not sure what all the talk about charts and graphs are all about ... I personally don't imagine ever using such an interface (I could be wrong) .. but I would love a way to list (at my post's permalink) video responses to my videos that people publish on their sites. Doesn't the above describe that pretty accurately? Charts and graphs? I don't know what you're talking about, but I assume you had something specific you were referring to? Sounds like what we need is a) a plugin that scans trackback urls for rev=comment and picks up any rel=enclosure type=video links within the same cite block ?? -- said plugin could then easily save for this trackback comment the same video comment fields that my recent plugin does for regular comments display them appropriately. (Other bigger/better plugins could use the same stored fields to display the video comments in all sorts of fabulous ways) basically yes but why bother scanning the trackback for rev=comment or rel cite. It's needlessly complex. What we need is a plugin that scans trackback data for an embed or enclosure. (Depending on what information is sent along in the trackback. I must admit I need to read up on it.) Anyway, if said enclosure or embed is found in the trackback... then this plugin would just display it in a similar manner to david meade's plugin. Rel=cite and rev=comment are needless complexity at this point. (am reading up on trackbacks, will clarify later) b) a simple way to let you post a video response on your site to a video elsewhere exactly -- what would be cool is a bookmarklet you can click in your browser while at someones post that sends you to your blogs write post page with the framework of the above syntax already completed. Just plugin your url to your video and your thumbnail and presto. (such plugin in of urls could be done in some whiz bang web2.0 way of course) hmm... basically what you're saying is creating a new post to my blog bookmarklet... that has a little additional meta info right? I could see this being expanded on later with all manner of features, but yeah, that's pretty cool. The key is step A I think. Details aside I think we're on the same page. To summarize. People should be able to respond to others video blog posts by posting a video response on their own blog (or directly in the blogs comments.) Either way that response should appear in the comments of the original blog post as an embedded item so it can be played right in the comments without leaving the page. Furthermore we need to push these video comments into the comment RSS feed... not just display them... so comment RSS feeds will need to become RSS2.0 compatible with enclosures... and increasingly other meta information should be included with mediaRSS and/or other necessary standards. At the very least this will alow people to track comments by using services like RSS-to-email... or by popping the comment RSS feed from a post into an aggregator like Miro of Fireant. I could see building on these mechanisms for video commenting in the future so that not only can you respond with a video right in the comments... or to your own blog... but a user icon of your choosing appears visually next to your comment. Never underestimate the power of a user icon in keeping conversations personal. This is something I find is personally lacking on most open blogging platforms. This user icon could potentially be pushed out through trackback mechanism... or be a piece of information pulled from your OpenID profile. From there of course we'd need new info in the comment RSS feed... such as a user icon for the author of each individual item. There may well be standards for this already. Anyway, I've gone a little to far and yet not far enough. I'm just painting a picture of where this is could go. It occurs to me I haven't even related this to the big picture I'm elluding to so I mine as well take it to yet another level. It is important not only to define mechanisms to bring the open vlogosphere up to speed with closed social networking sites like youtube and facebook, but also to make sure that data gets syndicated through RSS... so that it can finally be tracked wherever a user likes it. One day a user might not only be able to watch all their
Re: [videoblogging] Conversation Tracking (was: Plugin for Video Comments)
Hey, On Feb 5, 2008 10:33 AM, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I like the use of cite and rev/rel -- it's meaning that's already defined. cite a rel=enclosure class=comment href=... type=video/...img class=thumbnail src=thumbnail.jpg //a In Response to: a rev=comment href=http://example.com/what_i_am_commenting_to;.../a /cite Seems to say it all. Doesn't it? Yes although I don't think everyone will put in their videos as... a rel=enclosure class=comment href=... type=video/...img class=thumbnail src=thumbnail.jpg //a We may need to account for usage of embed and object too. Also using someone's embed code (that they mark with class=videoembed) might be useful in some cases. Although with a link to the video of the video comment you could set up the comments to play in your video too as a kind of playlist. (Would be useful if people are viewing this stuff on their big screen TV rather than on their laptop or PC.) I'm not sure what all the talk about charts and graphs are all about The graphs would be the abstract data structure used to represent the threaded conversation. And not how it is displayed. ... I personally don't imagine ever using such an interface (I could be wrong) .. but I would love a way to list (at my post's permalink) video responses to my videos that people publish on their sites. Doesn't the above describe that pretty accurately? Sounds like what we need is a) a plugin that scans trackback urls for rev=comment and picks up any rel=enclosure type=video links within the same cite block ?? -- said plugin could then easily save for this trackback comment the same video comment fields that my recent plugin does for regular comments display them appropriately. (Other bigger/better plugins could use the same stored fields to display the video comments in all sorts of fabulous ways) You'd probably want to have it so the plugin goes and re-checks those trackback every now and then... but that's just a detail. You also want a nice API to expose those video comments. Nice being like something in the same style a the WordPress Video API... http://docs.newtube.org/page/WordPress_Video_API b) a simple way to let you post a video response on your site to a video elsewhere -- what would be cool is a bookmarklet you can click in your browser while at someones post that sends you to your blogs write post page with the framework of the above syntax already completed. Just plugin your url to your video and your thumbnail and presto. (such plugin in of urls could be done in some whiz bang web2.0 way of course) You'd probably want it to also work without the bookmarklet too. But yeah agreed. See ya -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/
Re: [videoblogging] Conversation Tracking (was: Plugin for Video Comments)
It's wonderful to see excitement about this topic again, but as Sull says some level of samepageism is missing. I also have a feeling this list is not the optimal place to design such a system (a smaller working group would be better for starters). The last time the topic was seriously discussed on this list was back in August 2004 (!). It would be helpful to go back and read the comments back then to avoid having the exact same discussion all over again. I've collected my blog posts from then here: http://www.solitude.dk/tag/conversation+tracking (also includes links to some relevant threads on this group). There are many words on that page because this is a complicated issue. And yes, I still have a working copy of a pingback client/server solution that enables the technical side of this (no need to modify any spec. The technical tools are all available. No new specs needs to be written for this, no new CSS classes are needed). Code examples are also nice, but I think it's way too early for them at this point. It would be far more valuable to stop and sit down and think long and hard about how people communicate and converse on the web in general. What I've seen in this thread so far deals only with a very limited scenario (a person who posts a video and nothing else in response to a different video). That scenario doesn't even begin to represent how people are conversing, not in videoblogs, not in general on the web. A distributed commenting system must succeed in at least three cases: 1. Must be media agnostic and not make assumptions about the role of any media objects. Comments are not just a video or some text. At times the video is the main focal point of a comment, at times the video is a mere illustration and the meat is somewhere else. The system must not assume. 2. Must be able to support any kind of media mix in each comment. Comments are video with text or text with a photo or photo with a video (and so on and so on). The system must be able to handle these different kinds of media mixes. 3. Must be able to support a network structure (as the web), and not just threaded and flat comments. I'm seeing a lot of implicit assumptions in the proposals in this thread. It is imperative to make those assumptions explicit so it can be evaluated whether or not they are the correct ones. That discussion is not a technical discussion and that's why I think it's best to prohibit the use of technical jargon (no one is allowed to say RSS, ATOM, HTML etc.) to keep the focus on *what* kind of system you are looking to build before you go about solving *how* to build it. - Andreas Den 05.02.2008 kl. 13:33 skrev David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I like the use of cite and rev/rel -- it's meaning that's already defined. cite a rel=enclosure class=comment href=... type=video/...img class=thumbnail src=thumbnail.jpg //a In Response to: a rev=comment href=http://example.com/what_i_am_commenting_to;.../a /cite Seems to say it all. Doesn't it? I'm not sure what all the talk about charts and graphs are all about ... I personally don't imagine ever using such an interface (I could be wrong) .. but I would love a way to list (at my post's permalink) video responses to my videos that people publish on their sites. Doesn't the above describe that pretty accurately? Sounds like what we need is a) a plugin that scans trackback urls for rev=comment and picks up any rel=enclosure type=video links within the same cite block ?? -- said plugin could then easily save for this trackback comment the same video comment fields that my recent plugin does for regular comments display them appropriately. (Other bigger/better plugins could use the same stored fields to display the video comments in all sorts of fabulous ways) b) a simple way to let you post a video response on your site to a video elsewhere -- what would be cool is a bookmarklet you can click in your browser while at someones post that sends you to your blogs write post page with the framework of the above syntax already completed. Just plugin your url to your video and your thumbnail and presto. (such plugin in of urls could be done in some whiz bang web2.0 way of course) - Dave -- Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen http://www.solitude.dk/
[videoblogging] Re: Conversation Tracking (was: Plugin for Video Comments)
Mmm yes. It makes sense to talk about it here, but only if it can be done in a way that encourages wider input. It may b hard at this stage as a working prototype might be a lot clearer to the masses than attempt to put it into words, but may as well keep talking about it here for now anyways. So it seems we need to deal with conversations that are in different places and in a variety of media formats. My area of interest, and the reason I went on about how it would look earlier, is when it comes to these conversations not being linear, when they go off at tangents or are asides rather than the main thread of conversation. I would guess we will end up seeing a web rather than a straightforward chain? At that point my brain explodes. Ive just gone off social graph stuff. Im worried that relationships between people are open to a lot of abuse by spam or worse, that more emphasis is placed on the quality of such data than it should be. Im far more interested in graphs of conversations themselves, in what is being said between people who may not be previously connected, and may never be again. I guess I love the open and levelling nature of such conversations, no danger of getting all wrapped up with concepts like whether someone is a 'friend'. Im probably talking a load of rubbish, I dunno, got a temperature, my second cold of 2008 woohoo. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's wonderful to see excitement about this topic again, but as Sull says some level of samepageism is missing. I also have a feeling this list is not the optimal place to design such a system (a smaller working group would be better for starters). The last time the topic was seriously discussed on this list was back in August 2004 (!). It would be helpful to go back and read the comments back then to avoid having the exact same discussion all over again. I've collected my blog posts from then here: http://www.solitude.dk/tag/conversation+tracking (also includes links to some relevant threads on this group). There are many words on that page because this is a complicated issue. And yes, I still have a working copy of a pingback client/server solution that enables the technical side of this (no need to modify any spec. The technical tools are all available. No new specs needs to be written for this, no new CSS classes are needed). Code examples are also nice, but I think it's way too early for them at this point. It would be far more valuable to stop and sit down and think long and hard about how people communicate and converse on the web in general. What I've seen in this thread so far deals only with a very limited scenario (a person who posts a video and nothing else in response to a different video). That scenario doesn't even begin to represent how people are conversing, not in videoblogs, not in general on the web. A distributed commenting system must succeed in at least three cases: 1. Must be media agnostic and not make assumptions about the role of any media objects. Comments are not just a video or some text. At times the video is the main focal point of a comment, at times the video is a mere illustration and the meat is somewhere else. The system must not assume. 2. Must be able to support any kind of media mix in each comment. Comments are video with text or text with a photo or photo with a video (and so on and so on). The system must be able to handle these different kinds of media mixes. 3. Must be able to support a network structure (as the web), and not just threaded and flat comments. I'm seeing a lot of implicit assumptions in the proposals in this thread. It is imperative to make those assumptions explicit so it can be evaluated whether or not they are the correct ones. That discussion is not a technical discussion and that's why I think it's best to prohibit the use of technical jargon (no one is allowed to say RSS, ATOM, HTML etc.) to keep the focus on *what* kind of system you are looking to build before you go about solving *how* to build it. - Andreas
Re: [videoblogging] Conversation Tracking (was: Plugin for Video Comments)
On Feb 5, 2008 3:12 PM, Mike Meiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have no problem with rel=cite as an evolving standard... but most people don't use it yet and there's no reason we need to stick strictly to links using rel=cite. Anyway, it's irrelevant if we're using trackbacks. I assume trackbacks have their own mechanism. .. snip ... but why bother scanning the trackback for rev=comment or rel cite. It's needlessly complex. Are you sure that's the case? I thought they pretty much sent title, snippet, url. cite isn't a rel its just an html tag -- but the rel/rev attributes already semantically describe relationships between pages. Anyway, it may be required to request the trackbacking response and scan it for rev/rel attributes .. or it may not (if the content provided by the initial trackback is sufficient so be it) ... The point I was trying to make is that the syntax to describe all this (as I understand it anyway) already exists. People MAY not be using rev/rel in all the places they could today .. but they certainly wont be using something we just make up / pull out of the air ... might as well stick to the 'standard' that already exists, no? Rel=cite and rev=comment are needless complexity at this point. ?? In order to accomplish what? There is a simpler way to define relationships between posts? rev/rel has been a part of html for a while now. Making something else up is easier? What we need is a plugin that scans trackback data for an embed or enclosure. (Depending on what information is sent along in the trackback. I must admit I need to read up on it.) Well again, I'm not sure that trackbacks provide enough data for that to happen. Also, there may very well be many embeds or enclosures at a url. It's only the rev=comment video we're interested in. (isn't it?) Anyway, if said enclosure or embed is found in the trackback... then this plugin would just display it in a similar manner to david meade's plugin. (this assumes there is only one such item at the url) Furthermore we need to push these video comments into the comment RSS feed... not just display them... so comment RSS feeds will need to become RSS2.0 compatible with enclosures... and increasingly other meta information should be included with mediaRSS and/or other necessary standards. This is the easy part. (the plugin I made does that now). The hard part is identifying remote posts as remote comments to a local post. I would say at this moment I feel the next steps may be. 1) getting david meade's plugin to not only display video comments so they play in place, but also so that the comment RSS feeds include these videos as enclosures with other relevant metadata such as thumbnails and such Um that's already in place. :-) It was the whole point of the plugin - to get them as enclosures into the comment rss feed. Done. I didn't add mediaRSS tags (which allow for things like thumbnails), but I easily could. I'll add that to the next version. 2) possibly building a plugin or adding to dave's plugin the ability to identify videos in trackbacks and embed them in blog post comments so they can be played in place That's where I was going with the trackback scanning idea. But it would be pointless to do so until we agree on what identifies a video comment in a trackback. (I'm still of the opinion that the existing syntax of rev/rel gives us what we need here). 3) adding this trackback meta info to the comment RSS feed as well Isn't this already in place? I'm pretty sure they're treated just like any other comment. ... but a user icon of your choosing appears visually next to your comment. Never underestimate the power of a user icon in keeping conversations personal. This is something I find is personally lacking on most open blogging platforms. This user icon could potentially be pushed out through trackback mechanism... or be a piece of information pulled from your OpenID profile. A bit off topic, but I totally agree! I'm a big fan of the gravatar idea. ( http://site.gravatar.com/ ) There's already a WP plugin for this (and in fact, on my site DavidMeade.com if you post a comment it will display the associated gravatar with your comment). I'd love to see this sort of thing getting consumed from openID as well but we're getting sidetracked. The web page itself is irrelevant... a mere place holder. *gasp* surely you have not beheld the wonder that is DavidMeade.com ;P - Dave -- http://www.DavidMeade.com
Re: [videoblogging] Conversation Tracking (was: Plugin for Video Comments)
Here here. I'm very pleased with where this is headed. I'd like to keep the conversation as open (non-technical) as possible. Where you say media agnostic... I completely agree. It would be cool to have images embeded in the responses as well... and of course audio clips. We could make the world safe for discussion amongst all the Hugh McLeods, Joy of Tech and all other comics out there. God knows that comedy, and visual comics at that THE highest form of communication. :) I think Charles and David are well on the right track. I will continue to read up on what you've chronicled as well as trackbacks and other tech systems. On a side note, damn the new gmail is schweet... i see there are two responses just in the space of time it took me to write this. -Mike On Feb 5, 2008 3:17 PM, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's wonderful to see excitement about this topic again, but as Sull says some level of samepageism is missing. I also have a feeling this list is not the optimal place to design such a system (a smaller working group would be better for starters). The last time the topic was seriously discussed on this list was back in August 2004 (!). It would be helpful to go back and read the comments back then to avoid having the exact same discussion all over again. I've collected my blog posts from then here: http://www.solitude.dk/tag/conversation+tracking (also includes links to some relevant threads on this group). There are many words on that page because this is a complicated issue. And yes, I still have a working copy of a pingback client/server solution that enables the technical side of this (no need to modify any spec. The technical tools are all available. No new specs needs to be written for this, no new CSS classes are needed). Code examples are also nice, but I think it's way too early for them at this point. It would be far more valuable to stop and sit down and think long and hard about how people communicate and converse on the web in general. What I've seen in this thread so far deals only with a very limited scenario (a person who posts a video and nothing else in response to a different video). That scenario doesn't even begin to represent how people are conversing, not in videoblogs, not in general on the web. A distributed commenting system must succeed in at least three cases: 1. Must be media agnostic and not make assumptions about the role of any media objects. Comments are not just a video or some text. At times the video is the main focal point of a comment, at times the video is a mere illustration and the meat is somewhere else. The system must not assume. 2. Must be able to support any kind of media mix in each comment. Comments are video with text or text with a photo or photo with a video (and so on and so on). The system must be able to handle these different kinds of media mixes. 3. Must be able to support a network structure (as the web), and not just threaded and flat comments. I'm seeing a lot of implicit assumptions in the proposals in this thread. It is imperative to make those assumptions explicit so it can be evaluated whether or not they are the correct ones. That discussion is not a technical discussion and that's why I think it's best to prohibit the use of technical jargon (no one is allowed to say RSS, ATOM, HTML etc.) to keep the focus on *what* kind of system you are looking to build before you go about solving *how* to build it. - Andreas Den 05.02.2008 kl. 13:33 skrev David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I like the use of cite and rev/rel -- it's meaning that's already defined. cite a rel=enclosure class=comment href=... type=video/...img class=thumbnail src=thumbnail.jpg //a In Response to: a rev=comment href=http://example.com/what_i_am_commenting_to;.../a /cite Seems to say it all. Doesn't it? I'm not sure what all the talk about charts and graphs are all about ... I personally don't imagine ever using such an interface (I could be wrong) .. but I would love a way to list (at my post's permalink) video responses to my videos that people publish on their sites. Doesn't the above describe that pretty accurately? Sounds like what we need is a) a plugin that scans trackback urls for rev=comment and picks up any rel=enclosure type=video links within the same cite block ?? -- said plugin could then easily save for this trackback comment the same video comment fields that my recent plugin does for regular comments display them appropriately. (Other bigger/better plugins could use the same stored fields to display the video comments in all sorts of fabulous ways) b) a simple way to let you post a video response on your site to a video elsewhere -- what would be cool is a bookmarklet you can click in your browser while at someones post that sends you to your blogs write post page with the
Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20 Camera Noise
I was hearing an ³echo² type thing last time. Freaked me out, but it wasn¹t on the tape. Luckily. On 2/5/08 1:22 PM, Adam Quirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I use little Sony earbuds and I haven't experienced any delay. Maybe try messing around with the AT and wind cut options? Not sure. On Feb 5, 2008 1:10 PM, Christopher Polack [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:ottorabbit%40gmail.com wrote: Has anyone experienced an audio delay while using headphones with the HV20? I've tried it both with and with out my AT Mic and I hear a delay. On the tape it's fine. Any thoughts? Topher Polack Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Conversation Tracking (was: Plugin for Video Comments)
On Feb 5, 2008 3:50 PM, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mmm yes. It makes sense to talk about it here, but only if it can be done in a way that encourages wider input. It may b hard at this stage as a working prototype might be a lot clearer to the masses than attempt to put it into words, but may as well keep talking about it here for now anyways. So it seems we need to deal with conversations that are in different places and in a variety of media formats. My area of interest, and the reason I went on about how it would look earlier, is when it comes to these conversations not being linear, when they go off at tangents or are asides rather than the main thread of conversation. I would guess we will end up seeing a web rather than a straightforward chain? At that point my brain explodes. I personally believe there is no reason to ever display more then two levels of a thread at a time. I am annoyed by systems like digg and slashdot with their complexity. How this SIMPLICITY works in this scenario. For practical purposes you only need to see the original post and the responses pertaining directly to it. For example - Joe posts - jane responds - bill responds - jake responds - jane responds again Now... jane might have responded on her own videoblog and that may have 8 direct comments and 12 trackbacks on it... but if you want to read janes post in its entirety you can click through to it and read it and the 20 responses on Jane's video blog. - Jane starts a new thread on her vlog - joe responds - jane respond to joe - jake responds It is not necessary... and indeed needlessly complex to try and represent the whole of the conversation in one big gigantic tree. You can see this on conversations right here on the yahoo groups as well. Anyone using gmail, mail.app, and most other threaded email systems only sees the thread as a single level. Initial topic -- indidual responses If there is need for the thread to branch then someone, in the case of this thread David Meade, starts a new thread. As goes with this yahoo group so goes with comments on blogs. I'm not saying btw... that there isn't value in visuallizing the whole tree... it's fun, it's interesting... people might want to explore these trees to find out who the key influencers are and attempt to buy influence... who knows. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influencer_marketing But so far such reasearch has proven nothing but that it's impossible to predict influencers except in hind-site If there is a game or gaming, then the game resists it. Ive just gone off social graph stuff. Im worried that relationships between people are open to a lot of abuse by spam or worse, that more emphasis is placed on the quality of such data than it should be. Im far more interested in graphs of conversations themselves, in what is being said between people who may not be previously connected, and may never be again. I guess I love the open and levelling nature of such conversations, no danger of getting all wrapped up with concepts like whether someone is a 'friend'. Im probably talking a load of rubbish, I dunno, got a temperature, my second cold of 2008 woohoo. There's a lot of talk about key influencers and idiots who want to unlock the key of making viral media but the more such people probe and attempt to exploit the more the general population defies such influences and influencers. Indeed if there is any direction control is going it's to the people. The people are the one's who choose some viral phenom to happen while thwarting marketing and ad agencies best attempts to influence. No amount of prediction can change this. We see that right now in politics with gallop polls, and predictive markets. Noone can truely predict the winner. Prective markets in fact should be properly renamed reactive markets because that is truely all they're doing. But I'm sooo off point. Sorry. Peace, -Mike Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's wonderful to see excitement about this topic again, but as Sull says some level of samepageism is missing. I also have a feeling this list is not the optimal place to design such a system (a smaller working group would be better for starters). The last time the topic was seriously discussed on this list was back in August 2004 (!). It would be helpful to go back and read the comments back then to avoid having the exact same discussion all over again. I've collected my blog posts from then here: http://www.solitude.dk/tag/conversation+tracking (also includes links to some relevant threads on this group). There are many words on that page because this is a complicated issue. And yes, I still have a working copy of a pingback client/server solution that enables the technical side of this (no need to modify any spec. The technical tools are
Re: [videoblogging] Photoshop hints for Flickr newbie
Hi John, If you¹re spending all that time scanning them, which takes time, I¹d suggest scanning at print resolution, which is 300 dpi. You never know when you might need something going to print. You can always downconvert for web later. But you can¹t take web ready art and make it print ready. Make some backups of these scans, burn to CD or DVD, call them your masters, and keep them safe. Now you can prep for web. Make a copy of your scans. Web-ready art needs 72 dpi. And yes, Flickr will resize for you. It also allows for different size viewings, so I think putting up pics bigger than 600px wide is smart. Depends also what you are doing this for. Are you putting them up with creative commons licensing for others to use? Knowing why you are putting them up online may help you decide what size is best. There are lots of pros up there. Maybe you can see what they are doing, or ask them. Ok, back to prepping for web. Remember jpeg is lossy compression, so do not do your corrections to jpegs. It reapplies the compression and degrades the photo. Do them to .psd files. Save to jpeg at very end only. You may want to colour correct your pics. Depends on your scanner, they vary in how well they portray colours. In Photoshop, you can colour correct your pics. Easiest is with levels. You can do ImageAdjustments auto levels Or Image Imagelevels. I usually do the second one. Adjust this so that the blacks are true black, and the white is true white. Slide the little arrows in to touch where the ³peaks² start. Makes a world of difference. After scanning you may want to do a Filter sharpenunsharp mask. That can sharpen it up, make less blurry. Then you want to Save for web. Quality 70 % is usually good enough. You can automate these tasks (not levels or unsharp mask, those are done individually according to each pic¹s needs.) But Auto levels and then Save to Web could be automated. First you record an Action: Windowaction. Basically you do your optimizing to one photo, and record the steps you take. Then you Batch it. Fileautomatebatch. You can apply your Action to all the pics you have in a folder. That will automate the process, and help you save time. For your blog, you might want to make an action that resizes them to 600px. But start from the best quality to do this. Meaning don¹t do this to a jpeg you have all ready optimized for the web. Lossy compression is a a bummer that way. There are lots of tutorials on the web on how to do this. Hope that helps. Irene Irene Duma Strange Duck Media ...a good egg [EMAIL PROTECTED] T 416-769-1879 C 416-535-0652 web design and creative marketing blogging easy computer tips http://www.strangeduck.com/blog and comedy at http://www.bittertonic.com On 2/5/08 2:53 PM, John Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Charles, I'll start there and see what happens. JC --- Charles Iliya Krempeaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:supercanadian%40gmail.com wrote: If you're using Flickr why not just let flickr resize them? -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://ChangeLog.ca/ Motorsport Videos http://TireBiterZ.com/ Vlog Razor... Vlogging News... http://vlograzor.com/ On Feb 5, 2008 11:38 AM, John Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:jimmycrackhead2000%40yahoo.com wrote: A bit off the vlogger topic but somewhat related so thanks in advance for any help. I've got over 30 years of print photos that I want to start storing on Flikr. I'm scanning them into Photoshop (7/CS) and resizing them to a width of 600 pixels which works well on my blog, then Save for Web. Anyone have a better 2 cents worth? Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com __ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs Jimmy CraicHead TVVideo Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com __ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Conversation Tracking (was: Plugin for Video Comments)
Just scanning. Sweet, love the gravatar idea and that you already have included video enclosures in the comment RSS feeds. Can't wait to read up on gravatars (http://site.gravatar.com/). There have to be other explorations of this idea too. I think a user thumbnail is a natural piece of information that should be included as part of the openID spec and should be managed by the idenity broker wether that be 3rd party or your own website. I must admit i'm a bit behind on OpenID. fun stuff there. What I keep seeing is we're drastically simplifying what we'd need to actually accomplish these goals. What I see is a simple need to explore this video trackbacks idea and then to keep making incrimental improvements. -Mike On Feb 5, 2008 3:50 PM, David Meade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Feb 5, 2008 3:12 PM, Mike Meiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have no problem with rel=cite as an evolving standard... but most people don't use it yet and there's no reason we need to stick strictly to links using rel=cite. Anyway, it's irrelevant if we're using trackbacks. I assume trackbacks have their own mechanism. .. snip ... but why bother scanning the trackback for rev=comment or rel cite. It's needlessly complex. Are you sure that's the case? I thought they pretty much sent title, snippet, url. cite isn't a rel its just an html tag -- but the rel/rev attributes already semantically describe relationships between pages. Anyway, it may be required to request the trackbacking response and scan it for rev/rel attributes .. or it may not (if the content provided by the initial trackback is sufficient so be it) ... The point I was trying to make is that the syntax to describe all this (as I understand it anyway) already exists. People MAY not be using rev/rel in all the places they could today .. but they certainly wont be using something we just make up / pull out of the air ... might as well stick to the 'standard' that already exists, no? Rel=cite and rev=comment are needless complexity at this point. ?? In order to accomplish what? There is a simpler way to define relationships between posts? rev/rel has been a part of html for a while now. Making something else up is easier? What we need is a plugin that scans trackback data for an embed or enclosure. (Depending on what information is sent along in the trackback. I must admit I need to read up on it.) Well again, I'm not sure that trackbacks provide enough data for that to happen. Also, there may very well be many embeds or enclosures at a url. It's only the rev=comment video we're interested in. (isn't it?) Anyway, if said enclosure or embed is found in the trackback... then this plugin would just display it in a similar manner to david meade's plugin. (this assumes there is only one such item at the url) Furthermore we need to push these video comments into the comment RSS feed... not just display them... so comment RSS feeds will need to become RSS2.0 compatible with enclosures... and increasingly other meta information should be included with mediaRSS and/or other necessary standards. This is the easy part. (the plugin I made does that now). The hard part is identifying remote posts as remote comments to a local post. I would say at this moment I feel the next steps may be. 1) getting david meade's plugin to not only display video comments so they play in place, but also so that the comment RSS feeds include these videos as enclosures with other relevant metadata such as thumbnails and such Um that's already in place. :-) It was the whole point of the plugin - to get them as enclosures into the comment rss feed. Done. I didn't add mediaRSS tags (which allow for things like thumbnails), but I easily could. I'll add that to the next version. 2) possibly building a plugin or adding to dave's plugin the ability to identify videos in trackbacks and embed them in blog post comments so they can be played in place That's where I was going with the trackback scanning idea. But it would be pointless to do so until we agree on what identifies a video comment in a trackback. (I'm still of the opinion that the existing syntax of rev/rel gives us what we need here). 3) adding this trackback meta info to the comment RSS feed as well Isn't this already in place? I'm pretty sure they're treated just like any other comment. ... but a user icon of your choosing appears visually next to your comment. Never underestimate the power of a user icon in keeping conversations personal. This is something I find is personally lacking on most open blogging platforms. This user icon could potentially be pushed out through trackback mechanism... or be a piece of information pulled from your OpenID profile. A bit off topic, but I totally agree! I'm a big fan of the gravatar idea. ( http://site.gravatar.com/ ) There's already a WP plugin for this
Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20 Camera Noise
Check your settings to see if there's an audio setting to listen off tape. If there *is such an option, that's very cool to know since that is a more 'pro' kinda thing - to hear what you've actually recorded as opposed to a signal that just goes straight through the camera electronics. That made me curious. Check page 30 of the manual - the headphone out does double duty as A/V out - and there's a menu setting to choose audio or A/V. I'm guessing that the A/V out setting gives you audio 'off tape', which would account for the delay. Jan On Feb 5, 2008 3:56 PM, Irene Duma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was hearing an ³echo² type thing last time. Freaked me out, but it wasn¹t on the tape. Luckily. On 2/5/08 1:22 PM, Adam Quirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I use little Sony earbuds and I haven't experienced any delay. Maybe try messing around with the AT and wind cut options? Not sure. On Feb 5, 2008 1:10 PM, Christopher Polack [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:ottorabbit%40gmail.com wrote: Has anyone experienced an audio delay while using headphones with the HV20? I've tried it both with and with out my AT Mic and I hear a delay. On the tape it's fine. Any thoughts? Topher Polack Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links -- The Faux Press - better than real http://feeds.feedburner.com/diaryofafauxjournalist - RSS http://fauxpress.blogspot.com aim=janofsound air=862.571.5334 skype=janmclaughlin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: QuckTime 7.4 and FCP 4.5HD Disaster
Yes, yes and yes. I had a 'no-brainer' FCP project that should have been a couple hour render take all day. QT7.4 caused a memory leak in FCP4.5 that required me keep an eye on iStat, watching the memory consumed, but not released by FCP. Once it got near to maxed out I had to quit the render, quit FCP and reboot. Then repeat over and over until the render was complete. Had renders in AE fail too that had not before. Tried to downgrade back to 7.3 but to no avail. Installer will not let you overwrite a newer version. It's total bollocks.
[videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
I still keep my video at 320x240. Unless there is a really good reason, I'm doing some real high art lets say (which I'm not), there is no reason to waste that much bandwidth. The bandwidth is not free and it is not limitless. Someone somewhere has to pay for it, and I dont see the point of wasting it on my ugly mug talking a lot of bullshit. Any video I visit on the web better be really compelling for me to stick with it at hi res, otherwise I just close the window. Progressive download helps here (FastStart-Compresssed Headers) so the file can play while it keeps downloading in the background. Codecs have gotten much more efficient so it has been tempting to update my specs, and I've seen some lovely looking work coming out of the members of this group, especially stuff shot on HD. My little Flip recorder looks like poop anyhow so bigger sizes are necessary. Maybe when I get an HV20 or similar will I change my specs and workflow. Good question.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
Wow - 320x240. I haven't produced video that small in over a year. I think that 512x288 is the minimum I'd do, and most of the stuff we shoot is 640x360. We recently produced the video for the Santa Barbara International Film Festival and we did Flash, iPod 640x360 and HD 960x540. We interviewed celebs like: Cate Blanchett, Tommy Lee Jones, Ellen Page, Abigail Breslin, Casey Affleck, Ivan Reitman, Javier Bardem, and Ryan Gosling. In my opinion it was worth every pixel. You can see it here: http://pod.sbiff.org -Scott --- American Cliche http://www.americancliche.net On Feb 5, 2008 6:03 PM, influxxmedia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I still keep my video at 320x240. Unless there is a really good reason, I'm doing some real high art lets say (which I'm not), there is no reason to waste that much bandwidth. The bandwidth is not free and it is not limitless. Someone somewhere has to pay for it, and I dont see the point of wasting it on my ugly mug talking a lot of bullshit. Any video I visit on the web better be really compelling for me to stick with it at hi res, otherwise I just close the window. Progressive download helps here (FastStart-Compresssed Headers) so the file can play while it keeps downloading in the background. Codecs have gotten much more efficient so it has been tempting to update my specs, and I've seen some lovely looking work coming out of the members of this group, especially stuff shot on HD. My little Flip recorder looks like poop anyhow so bigger sizes are necessary. Maybe when I get an HV20 or similar will I change my specs and workflow. Good question. -- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: QuckTime 7.4 and FCP 4.5HD Disaster
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Brook Hinton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 7.4 also breaks renders over 10 minutes long (that's rendering time, not project time) in After Effects, and misc. problems have been reported with pre-FCPStudio2 Apple Pro products as well, though its the After Effects problem that is significant. Workaround if you already upgraded is to install 7.3.1 using Pacifist, though apparently this has to be done very carefully. Brook The Pacifist route is tricky, too. I blew it on one machine and I am going to test it on a backup. If I get a successful attempt, I'll post it here. In the meantime, I keep looking for something from Apple... Stan Hirson http://hestakaup.com
[videoblogging] Re: Does the file size of video matter anymore?
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, influxxmedia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I still keep my video at 320x240. Unless there is a really good reason, I'm doing some real high art lets say (which I'm not), there is no reason to waste that much bandwidth. The bandwidth is not free and it is not limitless. Someone somewhere has to pay for it, and I dont see the point of wasting it on my ugly mug talking a lot of bullshit. Any video I visit on the web better be really compelling for me to stick with it at hi res, otherwise I just close the window. Progressive download helps here (FastStart-Compresssed Headers) so the file can play while it keeps downloading in the background. Codecs have gotten much more efficient so it has been tempting to update my specs, and I've seen some lovely looking work coming out of the members of this group, especially stuff shot on HD. My little Flip recorder looks like poop anyhow so bigger sizes are necessary. Maybe when I get an HV20 or similar will I change my specs and workflow. Good question. I have an HV20, and it's pretty much overkill for internet productions. The good thing about it is that recording in 1080/60i, it's easy to green/bluescreen and do smooth slow motion effects. However, nobody's SERVING 1080i. They're all serving 720p. AppleTV serves 960x540x30fps or 1280x720x24fps. You always end up down-converting, and the render times are outlandish, especially if you do blue/greenscreening. Bill http://BillCammack.com
[videoblogging] 24-7 a DIY Video Summit - February 8-10, 2008
Looks interesting. February 8-10, 2008 http://www.video24-7.org/
