[videoblogging] Open Video
Anyone have any thoughts on this open video initiative? http://www.techmeme.com/090126/p99#a090126p99 CODEC: http://theora.org/
Re: [videoblogging] Open Video
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 9:26 AM, @sull sullele...@gmail.com wrote: net video is the new tv. steps need to be made now to assure that we can all play/work within this venue in the coming years. can't just assume corporate interests wont step in and make things difficult. I just want to clearly link to Chris Blizzard's post: http://www.0xdeadbeef.com/weblog/?p=977 I love the idea of a FOSS, end-to-end, video workflow. This especially makes sense when you start thinking outside industrialized nations whose citizens can afford to spend 5k a year on updating and maintaining tech gear. The strategy to get there is still unclear, but I'm glad the developers are now looking at web video. I know many of them just dont quite get what we need and why. People love a good challenge, and an open source video initiative is a HUGE challenge. Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790
Re: [videoblogging] Open Video
an inevitable initiative that finally is getting some legs. won't be meaningful for awhile but in time, it will be a HUGE deal i think. eventually, this playground will turn into a country club. so it will be critical to have open video to sustain the people that make-up the longtail/torso. net video is the new tv. steps need to be made now to assure that we can all play/work within this venue in the coming years. can't just assume corporate interests wont step in and make things difficult. i'd even support a government backing of this initiative as well. good time for it ;) sull On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 8:42 AM, Andrew Baron and...@rocketboom.com wrote: Anyone have any thoughts on this open video initiative? http://www.techmeme.com/090126/p99#a090126p99 CODEC: http://theora.org/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] My Video On Ringtone Rap
I did a video for a magazine editor (don't know if she watched it) after she twittered an article about ringtones being the cause for the lack of hip-hop sales in America. The video I did basically states that if Ringtones are the death of a musical genre, that would mean the death of all genres in music as most music has some kind of catchy hook. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNjgOJflHVc Let me know what you guys think. Matthew
[videoblogging] Re: Open Video
This is a great initiative. Will this help me play my old BetaMaxes. I'd like to see this get some momentum, and it is a battlefield out there. Or it could be one more codec to have to transcode and render in %*%%*%*%Final Cut. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman jay.ded...@... wrote: On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 9:26 AM, @sull sullele...@... wrote: net video is the new tv. steps need to be made now to assure that we can all play/work within this venue in the coming years. can't just assume corporate interests wont step in and make things difficult. I just want to clearly link to Chris Blizzard's post: http://www.0xdeadbeef.com/weblog/?p=977 I love the idea of a FOSS, end-to-end, video workflow. This especially makes sense when you start thinking outside industrialized nations whose citizens can afford to spend 5k a year on updating and maintaining tech gear. The strategy to get there is still unclear, but I'm glad the developers are now looking at web video. I know many of them just dont quite get what we need and why. People love a good challenge, and an open source video initiative is a HUGE challenge. Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Open Video
My only concern is that we don't have ANY high quality web video codecs yet, and I fear the results of settling for mediocrity as a standard prematurely. I mean h.264-level quality in an open video format would be great for now, but even h.264 has to be carefully encoded to get acceptably mediocre results for anything beyond news, straight documentation, and talking head videos, and even that's at data rates many people can't download. As a video artist who looks to the web as a new format and venue, this concerns me. Brook __ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Open Video
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Brook Hinton bhin...@gmail.com wrote: My only concern is that we don't have ANY high quality web video codecs yet, and I fear the results of settling for mediocrity as a standard prematurely. I mean h.264-level quality in an open video format would be great for now, but even h.264 has to be carefully encoded to get acceptably mediocre results for anything beyond news, straight documentation, and talking head videos, and even that's at data rates many people can't download. As a video artist who looks to the web as a new format and venue, this concerns me. Yep...the video creators are WAY ahead of the developers. But I think we just got to jump in. we need a community of FOSS (free and open source) developers who become as passionate about video codecs as you do, Brook. it's going to probably take 5 years for a solid foundation is built so open source codecs can be at the cutting edge. I know a big question is simply: why should I care about open codecs? aren't codecs free now? Flash and quicktime are monetarily free for the most part. Its difficult to find arguments for this now. The concern is when either/both these codecs become totally dominant...and web video is the new TV for lack of a better word. We need an open codec to either challenge the status quo...or be a solid alternative. Ars has a good summary of today's news: http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/01/mozilla-contributes-10-to-fund-ogg-development.ars Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790
[videoblogging] Media buy agreements
Hello, Does anyone have or know of any boilerplate media buy agreements, such as We agree to pay $X for 5 pre-roll 0:15 second spots, or anything of that sort? Looking for a very stripped down version of something like this: http://contracts.onecle.com/800-attorney/futuredontics.ad.2001.03.28.shtml Was hoping to find something at my go-to place for stuff like this, but nothing turned up at http://www.dependentfilms.net/files.html Thanks, Adam Quirk http://wreckandsalvage.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Open Video
It will be tough to displace h.264... Its everywhere now, new DivX for Windows is h.264 based (though uses .mkv file wrapper format). And from what I can tell both Windows 7 and Silverlight 3 will support h.264. Increasingly, hardware that we record and watch video on supports h.264. And as you point out, its hard sell the open stuff because of lack of practical advantage to most, an even tougher problem now than when we had these discussions a few years back. Mozilla want an open standard because one of the most interesting aspects of the new generation of browsers, based on new standards for html and friends, is embedded video tags. But there needs to be a good format available that browsers support, for there to be much reason for developers to use such tags. It would have been easier for them to get somewhere with that if Flash had not come to support h.264. But it does, so its likely to remain the dominant in-browser way to deliver video to the widest range of users, different operating systems browsers. Its a mess. And the codec itself will struggle to beat h.264 for quality/filesize/cpu use balance, because so many of the things that made h.264 better than mpeg4 are patented, which defeats the whole point of the open codec. And its not like the license fee issues of h.264 trap enough people to cause a large enough stink and legal inconvenience / something that feels like the trampling of our freedoms. Youtube didnt get where it is today because of h.264 licensing issues preventing the competition from existing. If something beyond normal video, eg interactivity, genuine multi media, really captured the public imagination, there would be a chance to try to fight that battle in that space. But it hasnt really happened, and even if it did, flash h.264 platforms run by some web 2.0 startup would move quickly to provide the winning user experience on that front. Personally the only battle I think is worth the effort in the browser video space, is the issue of energy consumption. There is some sizeable waste here that can be eliminated by sane use of existing technology, whether open or not. h.264 decoding built into computer chipsets exists, but needs to be pushed harder, especially for netbooks. And I havent seen an implementation thats working in-browser, I know flash tries to use some GPU for certain parts of the decoding but much more needs to be done. Theora will struggle to get dedicated decoding stuff for their format into chipsets, but they might be able to harness GPU's really well with their browser video players, if they choose to go in that direction. I might investigate pushing that agenda. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman jay.ded...@... wrote: On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Brook Hinton bhin...@... wrote: My only concern is that we don't have ANY high quality web video codecs yet, and I fear the results of settling for mediocrity as a standard prematurely. I mean h.264-level quality in an open video format would be great for now, but even h.264 has to be carefully encoded to get acceptably mediocre results for anything beyond news, straight documentation, and talking head videos, and even that's at data rates many people can't download. As a video artist who looks to the web as a new format and venue, this concerns me. Yep...the video creators are WAY ahead of the developers. But I think we just got to jump in. we need a community of FOSS (free and open source) developers who become as passionate about video codecs as you do, Brook. it's going to probably take 5 years for a solid foundation is built so open source codecs can be at the cutting edge. I know a big question is simply: why should I care about open codecs? aren't codecs free now? Flash and quicktime are monetarily free for the most part. Its difficult to find arguments for this now. The concern is when either/both these codecs become totally dominant...and web video is the new TV for lack of a better word. We need an open codec to either challenge the status quo...or be a solid alternative. Ars has a good summary of today's news: http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/01/mozilla-contributes-10-to-fund-ogg-development.ars Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790
[videoblogging] Re: SHVH - Ojai, CA
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, jimmyjay24 onarol...@... wrote: Feb 7th + OjaiDigitalDojo = SuperHappyVlogHouse A laid-back, over-friendly, often serendipitous meetup of vloggers Open agenda: share vids, discuss projects, ask questions, make merry Info and sign-up on the wiki (password to the wiki: sh1vh) Newbies welcome http://superhappyvloghouse.pbwiki.com/OjaiDigitalDojo ...this is your subconscious reminding you that SuperHappyVlogHouse at the OjaiDigitalDojo is a short 10 days away...where's that video I want to show...what's the name of that plugin...how do I get rid of the hiss...why does Markus call it a dojo--is he a ninja...
