[videoblogging] Re: Fake News
Thanks for the reply, I've been looking at Sony Vegas 8 and was wondering what feature would i need to learn to get the news show look? --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Brian Richardson - WhatTheCast? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd consider Sony Vegas Pro or Avid Liquid. Vegas has a pretty low entry cost, but Liquid has some sweet features (more $). Try Vegas on a free trial for 30 days and see if it works for you. On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 7:19 pm, kaytoh1414 wrote: Hi, I'm planning to make a comedy blog with fake news, like The Daily Show with Jon Steward. I'm wandering what kind of programs can help me put together a news like blog? I saw someone metion Camtasia Studio 5, is it the right program for me? bascially i need the intro where the a big logo is shown then moves away and a few boxes to hold guest speakers or pictures to illustrate a point. -- Brian Richardson - http://whatthecast.com - http://siliconchef.com - http://dragoncontv.com - http://www.3chip.com
Re: [videoblogging] fw: Mobile Videos: a Cybermohalla Ensemble discussion
thanks to both of you Rupert Adrian! I watched the film - I loved the reflections in the water and shadows. (similar bicycle shadows) I was wondering what people would have thought of him filming back then. these days almost everyone has a camera and points it, but back then I'm guessing cameras would have been more expensive relatively (?) and less people would have carried a film camera into the streets. I wondered what they thought of him filming the ground and the different angles. it was interesting to see the similiarities between the delhi streets film and the Regen one too. I suppose the human eye hasn't changed that much - similar people throughout different times still notice things in same way and have similar thoughts. I'll look out for more of Regen's work. 2008/6/14 Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thank you! I didn't know about that. I just found it on the Internet Archive: http://ia351416.us.archive.org/1/items/Regen/Regen.mp4 I'll watch it later. I love the whole idea of it. The late 20s produced such incredible things. On 13-Jun-08, at 2:40 PM, Adrian Miles wrote: Joris Ivens, Rain http://www.ivens.nl/film29-5.htm, 1929, 12 minutes. -- http://www.aliak.com
Re: [videoblogging] fw: Mobile Videos: a Cybermohalla Ensemble discussion
Can't speak to the reception of the work then (also check out the other works), but Ivens is, well, an international monument in documentary and a demi-god of film in the Netherlands (and probably the Benelux countries to boot). This is the sort of work that influenced figures like Chris Marker. On 14/06/2008, at 7:47 PM, Kath O'Donnell wrote: thanks to both of you Rupert Adrian! I watched the film - I loved the reflections in the water and shadows. (similar bicycle shadows) I was wondering what people would have thought of him filming back then. cheers Adrian Miles [EMAIL PROTECTED] bachelor communication honours coordinator vogmae.net.au
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Free Beer to the person who can explain the steps of recording
And then consult with Michael Verdi or Raymond Kristiansen - screencast kings who no longer read / post here much. Jan On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:18 PM, Chuck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't agree with your logic that mastery of the free tool needs to take place before you purchase a better one. If you're on a PC, buy Camtasia. Simple as that. Seriously. I like cabernet. :-) Chuck --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jennifer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So I've been pulling my hair out for weeks and just when I think I get close to having my 24 minute tutorial online for my team to see...something stops me DEAD in my tracks. I'm trying to record my audio and video (great quality not needed) of my screen (outlook, excel, browser, etc) so that my team can start taking more tasks off my plate. I would prefer to stick with CamStudio for now. I have 20 different people telling me to use 20 different software products and until I can figure out how to use the free one, I'm not going to start plunking down $300 a whack. I've been through every HOW TO RECORD SCREENS video on YouTube, Revver, SHOWMEDO etc and I have come to a few conclusions: 1. CamStudio will work just fine for what I need 2. The AVI file it produces is too large and I heard that it depends on the codec involved. 3. I'm clueless on the best compression method at this point and again I'm under the impression that using the same codec is important. 4. If I export to a SWF, audioacrobat can take it but bloats it up ten time bigger than original 5. If I export it to WVM it's all fuzzy and I lose the ability to see the text. I've redcued my screen reso to 800x600 before recording and tried to keep the end result at 640x480. I've tested both WMV, SWF, FLV and all come with issues. I've tried Reply, CamTasia, Media Manager 9, ViewletCam, Windows Movie Maker, VideoLAN/VLC, QuickTime, Windows Media Encoder, and now I've forgotten and have to start the cycle over again. Why can't anyone say Set the to , and the ___ to and give me a step by step from start to finish? Again, FREE BEER to whoever can explain this. Disclaimer, FREE BEER may be exchanged for cold hard cash. 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]
Re: [videoblogging] fw: Mobile Videos: a Cybermohalla Ensemble discussion
As one who loves mobile phone vlogging, these descriptions touched and inspired me. Thank you so much for posting them. Spot on. Jan -- Jan McLaughlin Production Sound Mixer air = 862-571-5334 aim = janofsound skype = janmclaughlin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re:From Mac *TO* PC -- Should I Switch?
I'd always had a pc (work) laptop until I bought a macbook pro for home. I couldn't afford a mac and the pc did most things I wanted it to. but usually I had to fix it before I could use it - even for simple installations - there was usually something missing and I had to install extra bits or the s/w I wanted to try was only on mac. since buying the mac I haven't had to do this, so I've found I prefer using it and am more productive on it than before when I had a pc. I can just sit down and start making things so I find it's better for my creativity levels. I like the software that comes with it - iphoto etc and how it's easier for me wrt to music/video/development tools. I'm an engineer and work on computers all day at work - years ago I used to like fixing computers kept up with hardware specs etc but now I'd much rather just use one. I still have a windows laptop for work and work on linux/posix systems too so go through the pain at work. but for home I wouldn't go back to pc now except for maybe a cheaper storage server desktop/archive system solution as it'd only be used for file storage perhaps remote access to files, though with cheap ISP online disk storage options available these days even this is a stretch. the one I bought originally had a screen problem - I think I must have bought one of the first batches - and the apple store support from where I bought it was terrible. eventually I went to apple australia during a trip home and they arranged a replacement and since then everything's worked well. they said it's easier to purchase online rather than the stores as the stores don't have the same infrastructure they used to for getting things fixed. if I'd known that at the time I would have bought it online originally like my first apple product - the ipod. the mac was more expensive but for me I don't care about that because it's saved more time in me having to get things to work first go actually getting something creative done, so was worth the money. over time the difference isn't much. the only problem I have now is I fill the disk all the time but that's a user issue not machine. I wish they'd let me use the mac at work instead of the pc. the best thing I like about OSX ( linux) is that when you open a few things at once and are working in one screen the other screens open in background and u can select them when u are ready. whereas windows pushes everything to the front when it's ready - it doesn't care if you're in the middle of typing something in an already selected window. this annoys me no end on a pc at work!! -- http://www.aliak.com
Re: [videoblogging] Re:From Mac *TO* PC -- Should I Switch?
Just begin to explore running XP on the MacBook Pro. Four years ago added a G4 laptop to the PC I'd always used. The peace of mind of not having to worry about digital intruders, being awakened in the middle of the night by the PC waking to scan for virus problems, junk being left on the PC hard drive after uninstalling programs... Ease of use... Elegance. The PC died over the winter and I'll not be replacing it, especially since I can run the XP programs purchased through the years on the mac. Seems like a win-win. Jan On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 8:12 AM, Kath O'Donnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd always had a pc (work) laptop until I bought a macbook pro for home. I couldn't afford a mac and the pc did most things I wanted it to. but usually I had to fix it before I could use it - even for simple installations - there was usually something missing and I had to install extra bits or the s/w I wanted to try was only on mac. since buying the mac I haven't had to do this, so I've found I prefer using it and am more productive on it than before when I had a pc. I can just sit down and start making things so I find it's better for my creativity levels. I like the software that comes with it - iphoto etc and how it's easier for me wrt to music/video/development tools. I'm an engineer and work on computers all day at work - years ago I used to like fixing computers kept up with hardware specs etc but now I'd much rather just use one. I still have a windows laptop for work and work on linux/posix systems too so go through the pain at work. but for home I wouldn't go back to pc now except for maybe a cheaper storage server desktop/archive system solution as it'd only be used for file storage perhaps remote access to files, though with cheap ISP online disk storage options available these days even this is a stretch. the one I bought originally had a screen problem - I think I must have bought one of the first batches - and the apple store support from where I bought it was terrible. eventually I went to apple australia during a trip home and they arranged a replacement and since then everything's worked well. they said it's easier to purchase online rather than the stores as the stores don't have the same infrastructure they used to for getting things fixed. if I'd known that at the time I would have bought it online originally like my first apple product - the ipod. the mac was more expensive but for me I don't care about that because it's saved more time in me having to get things to work first go actually getting something creative done, so was worth the money. over time the difference isn't much. the only problem I have now is I fill the disk all the time but that's a user issue not machine. I wish they'd let me use the mac at work instead of the pc. the best thing I like about OSX ( linux) is that when you open a few things at once and are working in one screen the other screens open in background and u can select them when u are ready. whereas windows pushes everything to the front when it's ready - it doesn't care if you're in the middle of typing something in an already selected window. this annoys me no end on a pc at work!! -- http://www.aliak.com 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]
[videoblogging] 1920x1080 conversion for web video???
Does does anyone have online resource for the math, or dimensions that will scale correctly so I can pick any size I want and change it. And is putting letter box into normal res smarter? etc. I've been feeling like such an idiot working with getting my new Canon 1920x1080 footage to the web (YouTube, Blip) without messing up the aspect ratio. Using FCE 4, the drop down compression is confusing...There's 16x9 and 4x3 settings for 720x480, etc. Then there's the preserve aspect ratio options, and more often then not my video ends up squeezed. I just came up this post here, and I'm trying it. http://www.foureyedmonsters.com/distributing-your-videos-on-the-web/ Heath Says: November 11th, 2007 at 9:04 pm Thanks, Arin, you rock. If anyone is using ***HDV 1080i/p footage, your frame size in QuickTime Pro/Conversion can be 600 x 338.*** This was given to me by Jon Fordham, who shot parts of Four Eyed Monsters and my feature film 9:04 AM. It's been GREAT!
RE: [videoblogging] Digest Number 5136
I will be on vacation returning Wednesday, July 2. I'll be in B.C., trying to stay dry, having a good time, and generally making the most out of life. If you're out that way, join me! We're having a big ol' BBQ June 25 in Vancouver: http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/778517/?ps=5 If you really need something, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the one true way. Cheers, Sunir Shah, Chief Handshaker, FreshBooks (416) 481-6946 x224 http://www.freshbooks.com/team/sunir http://twitter.com/sunir
[videoblogging] Re: 1920x1080 conversion for web video???
Hey Caleb. Long time no see. :) the dimensions are 16x9, across the board: 1920x1080 1280x720 960x540 720x400 600x360 480x270 If you're using AppleTV, the dimensions are dependent upon your frame rate: 1280x720 @ 24fps 960x540 @ 30fps Cheers! Bill http://billcammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Caleb J. Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does does anyone have online resource for the math, or dimensions that will scale correctly so I can pick any size I want and change it. And is putting letter box into normal res smarter? etc. I've been feeling like such an idiot working with getting my new Canon 1920x1080 footage to the web (YouTube, Blip) without messing up the aspect ratio. Using FCE 4, the drop down compression is confusing...There's 16x9 and 4x3 settings for 720x480, etc. Then there's the preserve aspect ratio options, and more often then not my video ends up squeezed. I just came up this post here, and I'm trying it. http://www.foureyedmonsters.com/distributing-your-videos-on-the-web/ Heath Says: November 11th, 2007 at 9:04 pm Thanks, Arin, you rock. If anyone is using ***HDV 1080i/p footage, your frame size in QuickTime Pro/Conversion can be 600 x 338.*** This was given to me by Jon Fordham, who shot parts of Four Eyed Monsters and my feature film 9:04 AM. It's been GREAT!
[videoblogging] Re: 1920x1080 conversion for web video???
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Bill Cammack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Caleb. Long time no see. :) the dimensions are 16x9, across the board: 1920x1080 1280x720 960x540 720x400 error. This should read 640x360. 600x360 480x270 If you're using AppleTV, the dimensions are dependent upon your frame rate: 1280x720 @ 24fps 960x540 @ 30fps Cheers! Bill http://billcammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Caleb J. Clark calebjc@ wrote: Does does anyone have online resource for the math, or dimensions that will scale correctly so I can pick any size I want and change it. And is putting letter box into normal res smarter? etc. I've been feeling like such an idiot working with getting my new Canon 1920x1080 footage to the web (YouTube, Blip) without messing up the aspect ratio. Using FCE 4, the drop down compression is confusing...There's 16x9 and 4x3 settings for 720x480, etc. Then there's the preserve aspect ratio options, and more often then not my video ends up squeezed. I just came up this post here, and I'm trying it. http://www.foureyedmonsters.com/distributing-your-videos-on-the-web/ Heath Says: November 11th, 2007 at 9:04 pm Thanks, Arin, you rock. If anyone is using ***HDV 1080i/p footage, your frame size in QuickTime Pro/Conversion can be 600 x 338.*** This was given to me by Jon Fordham, who shot parts of Four Eyed Monsters and my feature film 9:04 AM. It's been GREAT!
[videoblogging] Re:From Mac *TO* PC -- Should I Switch?
About your last point, i'm not sure if i'm reading it correctly, but you can use a program called PowerMenu which gives you an option to to give an window an attribute of being always on top http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/OS-Enhancements/PowerMenu.shtml --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Kath O'Donnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd always had a pc (work) laptop until I bought a macbook pro for home. I couldn't afford a mac and the pc did most things I wanted it to. but usually I had to fix it before I could use it - even for simple installations - there was usually something missing and I had to install extra bits or the s/w I wanted to try was only on mac. since buying the mac I haven't had to do this, so I've found I prefer using it and am more productive on it than before when I had a pc. I can just sit down and start making things so I find it's better for my creativity levels. I like the software that comes with it - iphoto etc and how it's easier for me wrt to music/video/development tools. I'm an engineer and work on computers all day at work - years ago I used to like fixing computers kept up with hardware specs etc but now I'd much rather just use one. I still have a windows laptop for work and work on linux/posix systems too so go through the pain at work. but for home I wouldn't go back to pc now except for maybe a cheaper storage server desktop/archive system solution as it'd only be used for file storage perhaps remote access to files, though with cheap ISP online disk storage options available these days even this is a stretch. the one I bought originally had a screen problem - I think I must have bought one of the first batches - and the apple store support from where I bought it was terrible. eventually I went to apple australia during a trip home and they arranged a replacement and since then everything's worked well. they said it's easier to purchase online rather than the stores as the stores don't have the same infrastructure they used to for getting things fixed. if I'd known that at the time I would have bought it online originally like my first apple product - the ipod. the mac was more expensive but for me I don't care about that because it's saved more time in me having to get things to work first go actually getting something creative done, so was worth the money. over time the difference isn't much. the only problem I have now is I fill the disk all the time but that's a user issue not machine. I wish they'd let me use the mac at work instead of the pc. the best thing I like about OSX ( linux) is that when you open a few things at once and are working in one screen the other screens open in background and u can select them when u are ready. whereas windows pushes everything to the front when it's ready - it doesn't care if you're in the middle of typing something in an already selected window. this annoys me no end on a pc at work!! -- http://www.aliak.com
[videoblogging] streaming video from your iphone with Qik
Just wondered if anyone has seen this yet and if anyone's tried it. http://gizmodo.com/5016004/qik-finally-comes-to-iphone Qik has come out with an app that will let you stream video directly from your iphone. Am guessing at this point it still works only on wifi. -Mike mmeiser.com/blog
Re: [videoblogging] Re: 1920x1080 conversion for web video???
As I understand it - it is advisable to have both dimensions divisible by 16 for the best encode by YouTube etc, so 480x272 might be preferable to 480x270 and 640x352 preferable to 640x360. Can anyone confirm? joly Bill Cammack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Caleb. Long time no see. :) the dimensions are 16x9, across the board: 1920x1080 1280x720 960x540 720x400 error. This should read 640x360. 600x360 480x270 --- WWWhatsup NYC http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com ---
[videoblogging] N93-like cellphone w/optical zoom? for qik.com
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Recommendations for a small camera (Xacti or other) to shoot in India I've been using my Nokia n95 to do interviews and streaming live to the web site using a Silicon Valley start-up called Qik. Check out my stuff at http://qik.com/djksar Granted it is a GSM based phone. Is where you are going GSM or CDMA? -Randy Some people on this list use Nokia N93 for video blogging. I like its optical zoom (but don't like the fact it doesn't have a qwerty keyboard). Are there any other candidate cellphones, with optical zoom QWERTY keyboard? The Motorola Q9C (for Sprint) has a QWERTY keyboard, but no optical zoom. Cellphone videos tend to look bad, so I'm also looking for quality. I have a Treo 650 PPC6700 (both over Sprint). The Treo 650 has better video than the PPC6700 (which looks choppy). I basically upload a recorded video (as opposed to video streaming) to Blip.tv or other blogging services. Works fine. http://07baja1000.blogspot.com/search/label/El%20Vigia%20autograph- session%20%28Sun%29 [ videos shot with Treo 650 ] http://07bitdtt250.blogspot.com/search/label/Race%20MM12 [ videos shot with PPC6700 ] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Kyte.tv Vs Blip.tv, Blip.tv can't transcode my PPC6700 .mp4 to .flv [ was N93-like cellphone w/optical zoom? for qik.com
On Jun 14, 2008, at 4:22 PM, B Yen wrote: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Recommendations for a small camera (Xacti or other) to shoot in India I've been using my Nokia n95 to do interviews and streaming live to the web site using a Silicon Valley start-up called Qik. Check out my stuff at http://qik.com/djksar Granted it is a GSM based phone. Is where you are going GSM or CDMA? -Randy Some people on this list use Nokia N93 for video blogging. I like its optical zoom (but don't like the fact it doesn't have a qwerty keyboard). Are there any other candidate cellphones, with optical zoom QWERTY keyboard? The Motorola Q9C (for Sprint) has a QWERTY keyboard, but no optical zoom. Cellphone videos tend to look bad, so I'm also looking for quality. I have a Treo 650 PPC6700 (both over Sprint). The Treo 650 has better video than the PPC6700 (which looks choppy). I basically upload a recorded video (as opposed to video streaming) to Blip.tv or other blogging services. Works fine. http://07baja1000.blogspot.com/search/label/El%20Vigia%20autograph- session%20%28Sun%29 [ videos shot with Treo 650 ] http://07bitdtt250.blogspot.com/search/label/Race%20MM12 [ videos shot with PPC6700 ] The above videos don't get transcoded to .flv by Blip.tv correctly. 3 secs into the video, it stops. You have to move the play cursor forward..then it plays, but with no sound. Can I get some multimedia experts to weigh in on this issue? I tried the Kyte.tv solution, the .mp4 (or my Treo 650 .3g2) appear immediately at: http://www.kyte.tv/channels/browse.html#uri=channels/69102 They don't appear to be using .flv conversion..or are they? The player looks like Flash. I like the ultra cool Flash presentation by Blip.tv http://07bitdtt250.blip.tv/ [ the later videos are shot with Treo 650, the early videos are shot with PPC6700..which don't get .flv converted properly ] or the matrix presentation of video thumbnails: http://07bitdtt250.blip.tv/posts?view=archivensfw=dc [ the later videos are shot with Treo 650, the early videos are shot with PPC6700..which don't get .flv converted properly ] But, the .flv bug is really a bottleneck. Can't make a presentation to potential clients. However, the Kyte.tv presentation lacks a matrix presentation. The inline player only shows, next previous videos. This is a little cumbersome.
[videoblogging] qik.com, kytetv and Rober Scoble's post on TechCrunch
I just saw this on Twitter and thought others might like to read this very in-depth article by Robert Scoble about how he is using cell phone video:: http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/06/14/why-kytetv-will-kill-qik-and- flixwagon-in-cell-phone-video-space/ or http://tinyurl.com/5ssot2 Pretty amazing things are happening in the live video space, and I really like how Robert explains why he likes features from specific services from a power user's perspective. All the best, Andrew --- Andrew Darlow Editor, The Imaging Buffet http://www.imagingbuffet.com Author, 301 Inkjet Tips and Techniques: An Essential Printing Resource for Photographers - http:// www.inkjettips.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] qik.com, kytetv and Rober Scoble's post on TechCrunch
On Jun 14, 2008, at 5:29 PM, Andrew Darlow wrote: I just saw this on Twitter and thought others might like to read this very in-depth article by Robert Scoble about how he is using cell phone video:: http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/06/14/why-kytetv-will-kill-qik-and- flixwagon-in-cell-phone-video-space/ or http://tinyurl.com/5ssot2 Pretty amazing things are happening in the live video space, and I really like how Robert explains why he likes features from specific services from a power user's perspective. I've been playing with cellphone video since '05, when I got on this group. I later caught on to this group's main intent: production quality videos. I'm into iTunes/iPod, since the iPod is a mobile media solution (just like cellphones). Agile Mobile Hostile -- football term (referring to linebacker) The problem with cellphone videos is that they don't have that Quality look, they originate mostly from pinhole cameras. Resolution ~ aperture. I think that N93 was using a non-pinhole camera (like from a real video camera). In low-light conditions, the pinhole cellphone videos look TERRIBLE: slow frame rates (because of integrated mode for exposure). You can compensate this with an external light. That Qik.tv video of the Tesla Roadster look choppy amateurish. Clients want QUALITY. I ran into a situation where a client balked. That article forgot about Blip.tv, it is a generalized solution (doesn't specifically target cellphone video, but can handle it): 1) production quality videos distribution points to Facebook, Myspace, Blogger, Wordpress, iTunes, et al 2) cellphone videos distribution points to Facebook, Myspace, Blogger, Wordpress, iTunes, et al [ I haven't tried it, but it is theoretically possible for Blip.tv to transcode cellphone videos to iPod/iTunes compatible .mp4..for a near LIVE delivery to iTunes!!! See if Kyte or Qik can compete with that. ] The Flash player Blip.tv has is incredibly KOOL, it really looks like Internet TV http://corracing.blip.tv http://score-international.blip.tv/ http://bitd.blip.tv/ I can upload .mp4 videos edited from a Mac (that get to iTUnes) OR cellphone videos. The only hitch is that Blip.tv can't transcode my PPC6700 .mp4 to .flv, however it has no problem with my .3g2 Treo 650 cellphone videos. # The distribution system that Kyte has built is much better than either Qik or Flixwagon. Translation: the embeddable player that Kyte.tv has is much better than Qik or Flixwagon, more on that in a second. See Blip.tv, it's distribution points are even better. # The chat room that Kyte has built is much better than Qik or Flixwagon and can be participated in from other cell phones, something that Qik and Flixwagon cant do. Strong point. Other CMS (Content Management System) use a comment section. Having live commentary is certainly a bump up. # The ability to mix videos from your webcam, live videos streaming from your web cam, recorded videos from camcorders, or from places like YouTube, along with both recorded and streamed videos from your cell phone goes way beyond what Qik and Flixwagon have done today. Just like Blip.tv, a *generalized* solution (not just cellphone videos) increases your market # Kyte.tv can play videos on an iPhone today. Neither Qik or Flixwagon can do that. # Kyte.tv can play videos on a Nokia today. Both from your recordings and other peoples. Neither Qik or Flixwagon can do that. Definitely a plus. Delivery to mobile-users via cellphone taps into a HUGE customer demographic. I don't have an iPhone (but I guess that might change soon), but doesn't the anticipated Flash functionality mean that the iPhone could play the Blip.tv Flash presentation (see above)? Another player was Textamerica.com (which went away last Dec 1/2007), which was my preferred LiveWebCast solution back in 2005/2006. It could take BOTH picture video uploads. (Note that Flickr has finally integrated videos into its solution, in conjunction with photos). Textamerica had a really nice Flash player, for both pics videos. After Textamerica.com went away, I went with the Blip.tv (automatic cross-post to Blogger) Blogger solution for LiveWebCast of Offroad Races. Even the Rose Bowl: http://www.jumplive.com/08rosebowl/index.html Note that media rights for Rose Bowl are REALLY TIGHT. ABC has exclusive video-rights (fans entering the stadium have their video cameras confiscated). I had to call up the Rose Bowl mgmt, to make sure I wasn't in conflict. The head of ABC prime-time programming called me after the even, so I could discuss Internet Solutions (ESPN handles that). It's interesting that Mike Hudack/Blip.tv came from NHL (must have been ESPN) All the best, Andrew --- Andrew Darlow Editor, The Imaging Buffet http://www.imagingbuffet.com Author, 301
RE: [videoblogging] qik.com, kytetv and Rober Scoble's post on TechCrunch
Good points, which is why I do both professional-style videos with $6,000 HD camcorders and a producer/editor etc (those are the ones you see on ScobleizerTV) as well as cell phone videos (which I put up at FastCompany Live). Both are at http://www.fastcompany.tv Interestingly, lately, I've had more sponsor interest in the cell phone videos. Why? 1. Intimacy. 2. Timeliness. 3. Community interaction. 4. Quantity. I've been watching the conversations that both kinds of videos start. On FriendFeed my cell phone videos are more likely to start a conversation than my professional videos. Mostly because they are more timely. My cell phone videos also are interactive -- you can ask questions while I film. That's something that you can not do with a $6,000 HD camcorder. Robert Scoble Managing Director, Fast Company TV mobile: 425-205-1921 http://www.fastcompany.tv Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/scobleizer FriendFeed: http://www.friendfeed.com/scobleizer -Original Message- From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of B Yen Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2008 6:09 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] qik.com, kytetv and Rober Scoble's post on TechCrunch On Jun 14, 2008, at 5:29 PM, Andrew Darlow wrote: I just saw this on Twitter and thought others might like to read this very in-depth article by Robert Scoble about how he is using cell phone video:: http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/06/14/why-kytetv-will-kill-qik-and- flixwagon-in-cell-phone-video-space/ or http://tinyurl.com/5ssot2 Pretty amazing things are happening in the live video space, and I really like how Robert explains why he likes features from specific services from a power user's perspective. I've been playing with cellphone video since '05, when I got on this group. I later caught on to this group's main intent: production quality videos. I'm into iTunes/iPod, since the iPod is a mobile media solution (just like cellphones). Agile Mobile Hostile -- football term (referring to linebacker) The problem with cellphone videos is that they don't have that Quality look, they originate mostly from pinhole cameras. Resolution ~ aperture. I think that N93 was using a non-pinhole camera (like from a real video camera). In low-light conditions, the pinhole cellphone videos look TERRIBLE: slow frame rates (because of integrated mode for exposure). You can compensate this with an external light. That Qik.tv video of the Tesla Roadster look choppy amateurish. Clients want QUALITY. I ran into a situation where a client balked. That article forgot about Blip.tv, it is a generalized solution (doesn't specifically target cellphone video, but can handle it): 1) production quality videos distribution points to Facebook, Myspace, Blogger, Wordpress, iTunes, et al 2) cellphone videos distribution points to Facebook, Myspace, Blogger, Wordpress, iTunes, et al [ I haven't tried it, but it is theoretically possible for Blip.tv to transcode cellphone videos to iPod/iTunes compatible .mp4..for a near LIVE delivery to iTunes!!! See if Kyte or Qik can compete with that. ] The Flash player Blip.tv has is incredibly KOOL, it really looks like Internet TV http://corracing.blip.tv http://score-international.blip.tv/ http://bitd.blip.tv/ I can upload .mp4 videos edited from a Mac (that get to iTUnes) OR cellphone videos. The only hitch is that Blip.tv can't transcode my PPC6700 .mp4 to .flv, however it has no problem with my .3g2 Treo 650 cellphone videos. # The distribution system that Kyte has built is much better than either Qik or Flixwagon. Translation: the embeddable player that Kyte.tv has is much better than Qik or Flixwagon, more on that in a second. See Blip.tv, it's distribution points are even better. # The chat room that Kyte has built is much better than Qik or Flixwagon and can be participated in from other cell phones, something that Qik and Flixwagon can't do. Strong point. Other CMS (Content Management System) use a comment section. Having live commentary is certainly a bump up. # The ability to mix videos from your webcam, live videos streaming from your web cam, recorded videos from camcorders, or from places like YouTube, along with both recorded and streamed videos from your cell phone goes way beyond what Qik and Flixwagon have done today. Just like Blip.tv, a *generalized* solution (not just cellphone videos) increases your market # Kyte.tv can play videos on an iPhone today. Neither Qik or Flixwagon can do that. # Kyte.tv can play videos on a Nokia today. Both from your recordings and other people's. Neither Qik or Flixwagon can do that. Definitely a plus. Delivery to mobile-users via cellphone taps into a HUGE customer demographic. I don't have an iPhone (but I guess that might change soon), but doesn't the anticipated Flash functionality mean that the iPhone
