[videoblogging] Re: What Video Format is Suitable for Large Screen Viewing (at a conference)
Hi! We show at conventions all the time and we use VEOH. We've shown on screens that were 14 feet and got extremely good quality at that size off the Veoh player. You need to download the player to your laptop and have your videos in that, but we've been very pleased with video performance from the Veoh player. Good luck! Sheila --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "jocelynford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am producing a short video for a conference on the Olympics and > media freedom that takes place in Paris next week. The video will be > viewed on a large screen. It doesn't need to be great quality (I'm > a newbie, so it won't be!) But it should be watchable. > > I have recorded the interviews in mp4 on a Sanyo C40 xacti, using a > Sandisk card. I can use either moviemaker or powerdirector6 > software to edit. I'd like to know what format to use for the best > possible quality images on a big screen. > > If I use videoconverter I can convert to wmv, flv, mpg, mp4, avi. > With powerdirector I can save it as .mpeg1, .mpeg2, .avi., divX, > avc .mpeg4. > > I also have powerdirector options like "write back to dv tape/hdv > tape (I would need to confirm whether the organizers have tape, and > the appropriate screening deviceI don't) and media max (whatever > that is!) > > Other options: I can upload it to youtube. I recall reading about a > trick that made youtube less fuzzy on bigscreens, but don't know > what it is. > > I'd appreciate any advice! > jocelyn > U.S. public radio/Foreign Correspondents Club media freedoms > committee > beijing >
[videoblogging] Microsoft Removes Internet Explorer's "Click to Activate" Annoyance
just saw this via drupal.org ... relates to video playback Begin forwarded message: > Microsoft announced this week that they were going to stop > purposefully > breaking Internet Explorer's activex controls [12], rolling back the > "click to activate" activex message that has been wasting the time and > annoying the hell out of web developers for the past two years. > According to the MSDN blog that announced the change this change won't > require any actions on the part of developers: > > > "It’s important (and cool) to note that this change will require no > modifications to existing webpages, and no new actions for developers > creating new pages. We are simply reverting to the old behavior. Once > Internet Explorer is updated, all pages that currently require “click > to activate” will no longer require the control to be activated. > They’ll just work. http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/bb969055.aspx Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Flickr adds video - max length 90 seconds?
My jailbroken iPhone has a video recorder that is really just a proof of concept: it records 5 seconds of video, no audio. Useless, but pretty damn exciting! > > -- Schlomo Rabinowitz http://schlomolog.blogspot.com http://hatfactory.net AIM:schlomochat [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Flickr adds video - max length 90 seconds?
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Jan McLaughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yup, you can use your email --> Flickr :) > > I'm doing that thru http://shozu.com > > Swet. Schweet jan. Looking into shozu.com now. :) As for Flickr, mobile video blogging, and mobile event coverage in general, please read on. First, Please speak up (anyone?) if you've ever experimented with getting video to work on the iPhone. There are many rumors the next gen will have video, but if it doesn't I may need to buy one anyway. I can't wait any longer. Second, As an alternative, has anyone used EyeFi camera SD cards yet? I think at some point I'm going to try one of these EyeFi cards as they can automatically connect to any open wifi point and send photos (and now videos!) to flickr and other common sharing services. This seems like a much better alternative then waiting until the iPhone supports video or buying some other alternative like the N95 because I can use the EyeFi card with ANY video camera I choose. The only problem with using EyeFi with Flickr that I can see is it automatically uploads EVERYTHING. I don't think they've devised any way to upload just one or two items. :( This isn't a huge deal for most, particularly because you can set it to upload your photos (and I assume videos) as private by default but I take A LOT of photos and upload less then one in a thousand. I've heard some people just mirror ALL their photos on flickr as well as their hard drive. This is not actually such a bad idea for many and would work great with EyeFi. It's just not for me. Maybe I could learn to pre-edit my shots better, but taking lots of shots is the key to experimenting and being creative. The communicator and the artist in me will always be at odds. Perhaps the answer to this schism between making art and communicating is to focus on a two pronged approach and keep communications and art separate. I.E. Always carry an iPhone or N95 for communicating with video and photo, but carry a separate higher quality camera for shooting video and photo. Indeed despite this one limitation the EyeFi + Flickr combination seems like an great way of doing event coverage at conferences and places with ubiquitous wifi. Case in point. Did anyone check out Andrew Baron's Maker Fair coverage on Flickr? http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrewbaron/sets/72157604450070157/detail/ more of andrew's perspective: http://dembot.com/post/31209664 This is not to say he used EyeFi. He didn't. It's not even mobile coverage though the exact same effect very well could be done via mobile video blogging. What I wanted to point out is how imminently browseable and enjoyable the Flickr experience is for events. This is the alternative we (all us attention deficit monkeys) have all been looking for for half hour+ videos of events that we can never sit through. I really enjoyed the clips for what they were though I would enjoy a little but of voice over / narration / background information and meta information in general on some of what's in the videos. I have never enjoyed any sort of event coverage on the web as I have this. Clips that contain brief interviews of the makers with shots of the footage are the absolute best. Once event material starts mixing with photos and content from different users in Flickr groups a sort of abstract telepresence that's truly interactive should be possible. This is not your second life kind of telepresence. It's better. It's real life. It's not 3D it's highly granular twitterings, photos, and videos. In general though Andrew's Maker event coverage is a superb use of flickr and shows why the 90 second clip limit rocks. I love the details view in particular for Flickr Sets as it allowed me to very quickly scan the 85 videos and choose which ones I wanted to watch first. This has me thinking that the whole world might be a better place if Flickr never lifts it's 90 second clip limit. If you want longer videos host on blip or youtube. Flickr is not and should not be about "episodes", "shows" or indeed any sort of linnear experience. Essentially Flickr is embracing the non-linearity inherent in photography, and in essence becoming a twitter for media. (What could be better!) If you can't say it in 90 seconds it's time to break it into two or more clips. Video as communication is at the heart of my reasoning of what this little revolution is about, basic, media rich mass communications. Personally I could care less about many of the innovations in so called episodic content. It's application for new's sake or entertainment is only by comparison marginally as interesting. Though channel101 and 102 do rock my world this right here IS the heart of what this little media revolution is about. For comparison, Andrew has pretty much the same set of videos on rocketboom. http://www.rocketboom.com/maker_faire/ As you can see it's the meta information (titles, descriptions, nice size thumbnails) and the social featu
Re: [videoblogging] "Are women less willing to speak their minds?"
I think the issue has less to do with the idea that women have 'trouble' speaking on camera and more to do with the ways 'women' think and interact about important issues. 'Women' are less culturally inclined to pontificate or embrace the pugilistic side of the art of conversation. Our interest is in tossing possibilities, ideas, solutions back and forth in the spirit of cooperation rather than being found 'right' or 'winning'. One problem with Moblogic is how the questions are framed. She could experiment with writing different questions for women - the same subjects, but approached from a feminine perspective. The other issue is that folks will speak forever and comfortably about stuff they're passionate about. My guess? Lots of 'women' (and 'men') aren't passionate about politics. Politics is by its nature aggressive, competitive and hierarchical. Those things are certainly outside *my* area of interest and expertise. I agree with Heather's essay wholeheartedly. Vlogging - as its commonly known to middle America through YouTube - involves for the most part webcam-based single talking heads. Folks pontificating. Conducting monologues. Dialog is more interesting and 'feminine'. It's feels 'safer'. And once you start taping 'conversations' it becomes more like film making than vlogging. It becomes more of a production. Okay, rambled - er - pontificated - enough. Great questions. Fun thinking about it. Jan On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 6:22 PM, scoobyfox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A question started by Lindsay Campbell on moblogic.tv after she had a > hard time finding willing chicks for her "person on the street" > interviews. > > Here are my thoughts about it: > > > http://subvert.com/blog/2008/04/11/are-women-less-willing-to-speak-their-minds/ > > I do wonder about the many many fewer chick vloggers. I know that I > get a lot more personal emails from my blog readers and vlog watchers > than comments. > > What do you think? > > I'd certainly like to see public conversation be less chock full o' nuts. > > heather gold > subvert.com | heathergold.com - the Heather Gold Show > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- Jan McLaughlin Production Sound Mixer air = 862-571-5334 aim = janofsound skype = janmclaughlin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
