from:"Rupert"

spam

On 16 Apr 2010, at 11:12, Ed Smith wrote:

 http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcmk8xrj_140hbr3j9pb

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 7D workflow for PC

Further to my post yesterday, I just saw this.  Steve Jobs replied to  
an email from someone asking about the future of final cut.

http://macsoda.com/2010/04/13/steve-jobs-next-final-cut-studio-will-be-awesome/

He said:
Next release will be awesome.

Um.  That's it.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:59, Rupert Howe wrote:

 I found myself tempted back to PC for the first time yesterday.
 Realised how often Apple decisions that affect video (in their apps,
 browsers, phones, Quicktime) have pissed me off and how little I trust
 them to keep doing the right thing.
 And then saw this - the Adobe/Nvidia Mercury Playback engine:
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xso6CGdsl2cfeature=player_embedded
 And thought about the possibility of switching back to Adobe CS5 video
 apps on PC
 You obviously like Premiere?  I haven't used it properly since the
 nineties, I don't think.

 Rupert
 http://twittervlog.tv


 On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:45, Adam Quirk wrote:

 I think I downloaded that and forgot to install it. Trying it now,
 thanks.

 On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Rupert Howe
 rup...@twittervlog.tv wrote:

 Sorry - pasted wrong link:
 http://www.cineform.com/neoscene/

 On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:35, Rupert Howe wrote:

 Have you tried using Cineform Neoscene AVIs?

 http://www.videoguys.com/Item/CineForm+Neo+Scene+PC/54E4543435F454E4.aspx
 Comes highly recommended for easy cutting of 5D Mk2 clips in
 full HD
 with Premiere.
 Costs $99, but they have a trial.


 Rupert
 http://twittervlog.tv

 On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:11, Adam Quirk wrote:

 I got a 7D at the beginning of the year and I'm still not
 comfortable with
 my workflow. Hoping someone here has some experience with it.

 1. Pull clips into my raw video folder using the EOS Utility that
 comes with
 the camera. This works well.

 2. Convert the 1080p h.264 clips to raw uncompressed AVIs with
 converter
 software (I use AVS). This is mainly because Premiere won't
 import
 them as
 is. Was hoping to find a preset online to download, but haven't
 seen
 one
 yet.

 3. Pull them down into the timeline and render the whole thing.
 If
 you don't
 do this, it's pretty much unusably jerky. Even after this, it's
 not
 always
 smooth. I have a powerful machine too. I find that if I disable
 the
 audio, I
 can scrub the footage pretty smoothly, but that just means I
 have to
 disable
 the video track when I want to cut to the audio. FML.

 4. Cut, render, compress.

 So this is a bitch and a half, and I have been reading up on
 other
 people's
 7D workflows around the web, but 90% of them are on Macs. Has
 anyone
 here
 been working with 7D footage on a PC?

 Thanks,
 Adam

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links







 

 Yahoo! Groups Links





 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links

[videoblogging] Stock/Royalty-Free Music sources

I'm trying to expand my list of stock/royalty-free music sources -  
particularly websites.  Which supply tracks that can be used for  
commercial as well as non-commercial use?
Do you have your own favourites or lists?  I'll compile  blog a full  
list to share.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

Re: [videoblogging] Stock/Royalty-Free Music sources

Awesome - thanks Adam.  Checking them out now.

David, that's just what I was talking about.  The Apple loops  tunes  
are great - just expanding my library :)

Would still like to hear anyone else's suggestions.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 16 Apr 2010, at 16:05, Adam Quirk wrote:

 Sound Dogs isn't free, but it's cheap:
 http://www.sounddogs.com/catsearch.asp?Type=1
 http://www.sounddogs.com/catsearch.asp?Type=1
 http://www.sounddogs.com/catsearch.asp?Type=1FreeSound is great  
 for sound
 design: http://www.freesound.org/

 http://www.freesound.org/ABFUKU is free 8bit music:
 http://www2c.biglobe.ne.jp/~abfuku/musori/muso_idx.html

 http://www2c.biglobe.ne.jp/~abfuku/musori/muso_idx.htmlKariokebar  
 is free
 midi: http://www.kariokebar.com/MIDI/indexA.html
 http://www.kariokebar.com/MIDI/indexA.html

 On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 10:43 AM, David Lee King davidleek...@gmail.com 
 wrote:

  For me, the primary source is ... my Mac.
 
  I just use iMovie/garageband, and either use one of the royalty- 
 free tunes,
  or create my own using loops.
 
  Not quite what you were talking about, but fits well, I think.
 
  David Lee King
  davidleeking.com - blog
  davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog
  twitter | skype: davidleeking
 
 
  On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Rupert Howe rup...@twittervlog.tv
  wrote:
 
   I'm trying to expand my list of stock/royalty-free music sources -
   particularly websites. Which supply tracks that can be used for
   commercial as well as non-commercial use?
   Do you have your own favourites or lists? I'll compile  blog a  
 full
   list to share.
  
   Rupert
   http://twittervlog.tv
  
  
  
   
  
   Yahoo! Groups Links
  
  
  
  
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
 
 
  
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] external hard drives for editing?

I did a bit of research on this before buying 2 months ago, because  
I've been burnt by Lacie more than once - and kept going back because  
of price.  But they end up costing twice as much because they fail so  
quickly.

I was recommended Western Digital by a couple of pro video people, but  
read some bad reviews online.

The one that seemed most attractive  recommended, and which I ended  
up getting, was the G-Tech 2TB G-Raid.  Cost me £250, which is about  
US $375.  It's doing really well so far, but then they always seem to  
be fine until one day they fail to mount...

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 16 Apr 2010, at 16:20, David Lee King wrote:

 I'd like to move to doing more editing of videos and music off of an
 external hard drive... I've used LaCie drives for that before, and  
 that
 seemed to work ok. But wanted to find out you amazing video peeps  
 suggest -
 what would you buy/what do you use?

 Thanks!

 David Lee King
 davidleeking.com - blog
 davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog
 twitter | skype: davidleeking

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] video blogging week 2010, take a moment

Brilliant.

On 16 Apr 2010, at 19:59, Heath wrote:

 Anyone who does online video should take a moment and watch this

 http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2010/04/16/a-moment-2/

 From one of the best out there..love ya mike...

 Heath
 http://heathparks.com/blog


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Google to open source VP8

Mozilla reckon that Firefox handles 30% of worldwide web access.  And  
you can bet it's an even higher percentage of people who watch online  
video.  Even after IE9  with HTML5 becomes widely used in a few years,  
that 30% lack of support for h.264 (or more by then) will be a big  
issue for anyone wanting to use HTML5 for video. Unless Mozilla change  
their mind.

Interesting to see what Microsoft will do about video codecs in IE9.   
Have they said? I haven't seen.  If they do allow ogg/vp8 to be used  
with the video tag, will it just be the 5% Safari users and iPad/ 
iPhone users who'll be left out?  That'd be pretty decisive and easy  
to prioritize for producers.  And if they fail to support it, and just  
support h.264  their own codecs, it'll be just the 30+% Firefox   
Opera users who are in the minority, tipping the balance the other way  
- but not decisively, just annoyingly?  Given Microsoft's record of  
driving web professionals mad with their browsers, you have to worry  
that sanity will not prevail here.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 14 Apr 2010, at 22:43, elbowsofdeath wrote:

 Forgot to say that its also possible that VP8 support could be added  
 to Flash if it starts to take off, which would be a workaround for  
 some browsers that may not support it directly.

 Whatever happens, h.264 remains the best option for maximum browser  
 compatibility for a while, due to flashs ability to play it and the  
 number of browsers that can play it directly. Couple this with the  
 large quantity of video already in h.264 format and you have a  
 situation where sites can start offering their videos to some  
 browsers without using flash without too much effort at all. This at  
 least gives html5 video tag some chance to be used for real,  
 regardless of what happens over a longer period of time with other  
 formats like VP8.

 Apple are clearly promoting html5 in quite an aggressive way as a  
 major part of their war with flash on iphones and ipads, and have  
 apparently been trying to convince various large websites to make  
 versions of the site that dont use flash for video, with mixed  
 results so far.

 Cheers

 Steve Elbows

 --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, elbowsofdeath st...@...  
 wrote:

 
  It really will be interesting to see what happens with browsers,  
 Google will certainly make Chrome attractive by presumably  
 supporting all 3 of the formats we are talking about, some others  
 may follow suite as a result, or if h.264 dominates html5 video on  
 the web then Firefox may end up having to do a workaround to provide  
 support too, such as relying on the OS or a plugin to do the job.
 
  Flash is a big winner so long as there is html5 video codec mess  
 in the browser arena. This is another reason I dont want the battle  
 to be too complex  prolonged.
 


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Pinnacle Studio HD

Did you ever try the trial version of Vegas?  They say they can cut  
anything without conversion.  And their export options are pretty  
comprehensive, so should avoid you having to use Handbrake.
I had the odd glitch trying to trim Xacti h.264 clips with it when I  
last used it a couple of years ago, but that was also a couple of  
versions ago, so it might be better at it now.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 15 Apr 2010, at 14:27, David Jones wrote:

 For those playing along at home...

 Been using Ulead VideoStudio 12 for many years now, and the last few
 months for the HD H.264 direct editing as you may know. I needed to
 use Handbrake also for final output conversion.
 So I decided to give the trial version of Pinnacle Studio HD 14 a go.

 Just did a blog with it, and with no help or references had my latest
 blog done very quickly and smoothly within an hour on my first try, I
 really like it, quite intuitive.
 H.264 1280x720 HD playback is instant, and editing is generally pretty
 smooth, better than Ulead. Still a bit jerky on the clip trim bars,
 but I often don't have to use them thanks to the audio waveform
 display below the video, so I can see when I start speaking and move
 the bar directly to it instead of start/spot listening I have to do
 with Ulead.

 It outputs just fine directly in 1280x768 30fps MPEG4 for Youtube. So
 no more having the two step process of outputting in MEG2 and then
 converting to MPEG4 with handbrake.
 Final HD rendering seemed quite slow at 4Mpbs, and it wouldn't let me
 do high bandwidth stuff in the background like play a youtube video
 properly, but it's faster than the previous two step MPEG2-MP4
 process.

 But for some reason it's Best Quality direct upload Youtube setting
 is only 640x360, so that feature is useless, so I'll juts output to
 MP4 HD and upload to Youtube manually.
 The iPod feature is useless too, it won't output in my desired
 480x272, nor will it allow me to customise the video data rate. So
 I'll still have to use Handbrake for this.
 The MP3 audio output option is very nice, but it seems to have a bug
 in that I select 64kbps and it always gives me 192kps.

 So if you are looking to do direct H.264 MPEG4 video editing (like
 directly from a Sanyo Xacti or similar) then I'd recommend you give
 Pinnacle Studio 14 a try. Looks like I'll be buying this one and
 making the switch.

 Dave.

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 7D workflow for PC

Have you tried using Cineform Neoscene AVIs?
http://www.videoguys.com/Item/CineForm+Neo+Scene+PC/54E4543435F454E4.aspx
Comes highly recommended for easy cutting of 5D Mk2 clips in full HD  
with Premiere.
Costs $99, but they have a trial.


Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:11, Adam Quirk wrote:

 I got a 7D at the beginning of the year and I'm still not  
 comfortable with
 my workflow. Hoping someone here has some experience with it.

 1. Pull clips into my raw video folder using the EOS Utility that  
 comes with
 the camera. This works well.

 2. Convert the 1080p h.264 clips to raw uncompressed AVIs with  
 converter
 software (I use AVS). This is mainly because Premiere won't import  
 them as
 is. Was hoping to find a preset online to download, but haven't seen  
 one
 yet.

 3. Pull them down into the timeline and render the whole thing. If  
 you don't
 do this, it's pretty much unusably jerky. Even after this, it's not  
 always
 smooth. I have a powerful machine too. I find that if I disable the  
 audio, I
 can scrub the footage pretty smoothly, but that just means I have to  
 disable
 the video track when I want to cut to the audio. FML.

 4. Cut, render, compress.

 So this is a bitch and a half, and I have been reading up on other  
 people's
 7D workflows around the web, but 90% of them are on Macs. Has anyone  
 here
 been working with 7D footage on a PC?

 Thanks,
 Adam

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 7D workflow for PC

Sorry - pasted wrong link:
http://www.cineform.com/neoscene/

On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:35, Rupert Howe wrote:

 Have you tried using Cineform Neoscene AVIs?
 http://www.videoguys.com/Item/CineForm+Neo+Scene+PC/54E4543435F454E4.aspx
 Comes highly recommended for easy cutting of 5D Mk2 clips in full HD
 with Premiere.
 Costs $99, but they have a trial.


 Rupert
 http://twittervlog.tv

 On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:11, Adam Quirk wrote:

 I got a 7D at the beginning of the year and I'm still not
 comfortable with
 my workflow. Hoping someone here has some experience with it.

 1. Pull clips into my raw video folder using the EOS Utility that
 comes with
 the camera. This works well.

 2. Convert the 1080p h.264 clips to raw uncompressed AVIs with
 converter
 software (I use AVS). This is mainly because Premiere won't import
 them as
 is. Was hoping to find a preset online to download, but haven't seen
 one
 yet.

 3. Pull them down into the timeline and render the whole thing. If
 you don't
 do this, it's pretty much unusably jerky. Even after this, it's not
 always
 smooth. I have a powerful machine too. I find that if I disable the
 audio, I
 can scrub the footage pretty smoothly, but that just means I have to
 disable
 the video track when I want to cut to the audio. FML.

 4. Cut, render, compress.

 So this is a bitch and a half, and I have been reading up on other
 people's
 7D workflows around the web, but 90% of them are on Macs. Has anyone
 here
 been working with 7D footage on a PC?

 Thanks,
 Adam

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [videoblogging] 7D workflow for PC

I found myself tempted back to PC for the first time yesterday.
Realised how often Apple decisions that affect video (in their apps,  
browsers, phones, Quicktime) have pissed me off and how little I trust  
them to keep doing the right thing.
And then saw this - the Adobe/Nvidia Mercury Playback engine:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xso6CGdsl2cfeature=player_embedded
And thought about the possibility of switching back to Adobe CS5 video  
apps on PC
You obviously like Premiere?  I haven't used it properly since the  
nineties, I don't think.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:45, Adam Quirk wrote:

 I think I downloaded that and forgot to install it. Trying it now,  
 thanks.

 On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Rupert Howe  
 rup...@twittervlog.tv wrote:

  Sorry - pasted wrong link:
  http://www.cineform.com/neoscene/
 
  On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:35, Rupert Howe wrote:
 
   Have you tried using Cineform Neoscene AVIs?
  
  http://www.videoguys.com/Item/CineForm+Neo+Scene+PC/54E4543435F454E4.aspx
   Comes highly recommended for easy cutting of 5D Mk2 clips in  
 full HD
   with Premiere.
   Costs $99, but they have a trial.
  
  
   Rupert
   http://twittervlog.tv
  
   On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:11, Adam Quirk wrote:
  
   I got a 7D at the beginning of the year and I'm still not
   comfortable with
   my workflow. Hoping someone here has some experience with it.
  
   1. Pull clips into my raw video folder using the EOS Utility that
   comes with
   the camera. This works well.
  
   2. Convert the 1080p h.264 clips to raw uncompressed AVIs with
   converter
   software (I use AVS). This is mainly because Premiere won't  
 import
   them as
   is. Was hoping to find a preset online to download, but haven't  
 seen
   one
   yet.
  
   3. Pull them down into the timeline and render the whole thing.  
 If
   you don't
   do this, it's pretty much unusably jerky. Even after this, it's  
 not
   always
   smooth. I have a powerful machine too. I find that if I disable  
 the
   audio, I
   can scrub the footage pretty smoothly, but that just means I  
 have to
   disable
   the video track when I want to cut to the audio. FML.
  
   4. Cut, render, compress.
  
   So this is a bitch and a half, and I have been reading up on  
 other
   people's
   7D workflows around the web, but 90% of them are on Macs. Has  
 anyone
   here
   been working with 7D footage on a PC?
  
   Thanks,
   Adam
  
   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  
  
  
  
  
  
   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  
  
  
   
  
   Yahoo! Groups Links
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
  
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: 7D workflow for PC

I loved using Vegas when I had to use PCs for a couple of projects  -  
but the thing that attracts me to Premiere is the way that Adobe CS  
Apps work together, particularly Premiere  After Effects.


On 15 Apr 2010, at 18:06, Heath wrote:

 If you haven't tried Sony Vegas yet, give them a shot...you can get  
 a free full working trial for 30 daysFor PC's I think it's the  
 best editing software out there

 Heath
 http://heathparks.com/blog

 --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adam Quirk qu...@... wrote:
 
  I just said thanks Rupert out loud. Neoscene just made my life  
 much
  easier. I'm kicking myself for sitting on it this whole time.
 
  Yeah I like Premiere, but it's a fickle mistress. It crashes every  
 once in a
  while, as do all computer programs I suppose. I think it's about  
 the same as
  Final Cut, but I've only used FCP a couple times. I really like  
 the keyframe
  animation options built into Premiere, and it's pretty easy to  
 switch back
  and forth between After Effects and Premiere on the same project.  
 In my
  dreams, AE has audio editing and can import any codec.
 
  AQ
 
  On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Rupert Howe rup...@... wrote:
 
   I found myself tempted back to PC for the first time yesterday.
   Realised how often Apple decisions that affect video (in their  
 apps,
   browsers, phones, Quicktime) have pissed me off and how little I  
 trust
   them to keep doing the right thing.
   And then saw this - the Adobe/Nvidia Mercury Playback engine:
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xso6CGdsl2cfeature=player_embedded
   And thought about the possibility of switching back to Adobe CS5  
 video
   apps on PC
   You obviously like Premiere? I haven't used it properly since the
   nineties, I don't think.
  
   Rupert
   http://twittervlog.tv
  
  
   On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:45, Adam Quirk wrote:
  
I think I downloaded that and forgot to install it. Trying it  
 now,
thanks.
   
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Rupert Howe
rup...@... wrote:
   
 Sorry - pasted wrong link:
 http://www.cineform.com/neoscene/

 On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:35, Rupert Howe wrote:

  Have you tried using Cineform Neoscene AVIs?
 

   http://www.videoguys.com/Item/CineForm+Neo+Scene+PC/54E4543435F454E4.aspx
  Comes highly recommended for easy cutting of 5D Mk2 clips in
full HD
  with Premiere.
  Costs $99, but they have a trial.
 
 
  Rupert
  http://twittervlog.tv
 
  On 15 Apr 2010, at 16:11, Adam Quirk wrote:
 
  I got a 7D at the beginning of the year and I'm still not
  comfortable with
  my workflow. Hoping someone here has some experience with  
 it.
 
  1. Pull clips into my raw video folder using the EOS  
 Utility that
  comes with
  the camera. This works well.
 
  2. Convert the 1080p h.264 clips to raw uncompressed AVIs  
 with
  converter
  software (I use AVS). This is mainly because Premiere won't
import
  them as
  is. Was hoping to find a preset online to download, but  
 haven't
seen
  one
  yet.
 
  3. Pull them down into the timeline and render the whole  
 thing.
If
  you don't
  do this, it's pretty much unusably jerky. Even after  
 this, it's
not
  always
  smooth. I have a powerful machine too. I find that if I  
 disable
the
  audio, I
  can scrub the footage pretty smoothly, but that just  
 means I
have to
  disable
  the video track when I want to cut to the audio. FML.
 
  4. Cut, render, compress.
 
  So this is a bitch and a half, and I have been reading up  
 on
other
  people's
  7D workflows around the web, but 90% of them are on Macs.  
 Has
anyone
  here
  been working with 7D footage on a PC?
 
  Thanks,
  Adam
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
 
 
 
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
 
 
  
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links




   
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   
   
   
  
  
  
   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  
  
  
   
  
   Yahoo! Groups Links
  
  
  
  
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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

Re: [videoblogging] Re: 7D workflow for PC

wow - great news!  i didn't even know Lightworks existed any more -  
haven't heard of it for years.  had an editor who used it in 2001 for  
some short TV films - thought at the time that it was much better than  
Avid.  very like FCP.  used to be used by lots of editors in the UK  
for both film  TV.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



On 15 Apr 2010, at 21:20, Jay dedman wrote:

 On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Adam Quirk  
 qu...@wreckandsalvage.com
 wrote:
  I'm so used to Premiere at this point that I probably won't switch  
 unless
  some open-source competitor comes along with all the features I  
 need.

 cue the FOSS announcement
 *Oscar and Emmy award-winning editing software 'Lightworks is going
 open-source*.
 http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/04/oscar-winning-video-editor-goes-open.html

 Jay

 --
 http://ryanishungry.com
 http://twitter.com/jaydedman
 917 371 6790

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Streamy disaster

I thought earlier today that Irina should have been organising the  
Streamys.  Now I realise that Irina  Rox is the dream team.  Someone  
should tell them.

On 15 Apr 2010, at 23:57, Roxanne Darling wrote:

 Irina: agreed on the dubious pay for play and it feels good to be
 recognized for hard work.
 Rupert: agree that having more women involve might have helped and  
 tech
 should have been the given.
 Quirk: People are rightfully pissed. Yeah.
 Mark: Disrespecting the audience is a clear problem, I agree. If you  
 are
 going to make it R-rated, it's your choice, though you better pre- 
 announce
 that.

 As a group, internet video has so much potential. But many of those  
 who are
 inspired to take the lead on these things also seem to have serious  
 issues
 with maturity and basic event promotion competence. I produced a  
 podcamp
 here in 2008 - over 400 attended live and thousands more via  
 livestream.
 There were no streakers or swear words and wow what a great time we  
 had!
 Aunties were blogging by the end of the 2 days and our tag hit #1 on  
 Twitter
 and Flickr - from a big crowd of newbies. We did no traditional  
 marketing or
 advertising - all via social networks and WOM. So I know this can  
 all be
 done using the tools we love and sharing the ideas we know are  
 relevant and
 in demand.

 I detached from being part of the in crowd years ago, both because  
 of the
 geographical isolation in Hawaii (I just can't drop in to the LA and  
 NYC
 meetings and those crowds seem to forget there are others who don't  
 show up
 in the F2F events) as well as not fitting in one of the mainstream
 categories. Surely our 4+ years, 760 episodes, nearly 3 M views, and
 literally saving a few lives has a place somewhere? :-)

 Often a big fail can open things up for enlightenment. I'm putting  
 my vote
 in that direction.

 Now, onto brighter and happier thoughts!

 Love,

 Rox

 On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Irina irina...@gmail.com wrote:



 chance's story showed that charging nominees for participation is a  
 dubious
 undertaking -- since without nominees there would be no industry  
 and no
 award show in the first place. second of all, making anyone feel  
 left out
 (since this is the web, which is pretty much an all-inclusive type of
 environment) with special entrances and seating is another weird  
 idea.

 work on getting sponsors to pay for things so people dont have to.  
 thats
 what sponsors are for. ergo, free food and liquor if i can help it.

 trust me, people brought their friends and kids to the vloggies and  
 the
 winnies too. because its fun. and because it feels good to be  
 recognized
 for
 hard work.


 On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Rupert Howe  
 rup...@twittervlog.tvrupert%40twittervlog.tv
 wrote:

 I'm also glad that it wasn't like the Oscars. LA  NY people
 consolidating their power.

 And Chance's personal story is depressing, but really... the whole
 thing reads like a Greek tragedy. Pride before the fall. I mean, he
 *really* thought he was going to the Oscars?? And brought all his
 friends and colleagues... and their children?! WTF.

 And I can't agree with the It's terrible for the industry! people.
 It will be *good* for the profile of web video, not bad. I've seen
 enough intentionally controversial and offensive theatre in London  
 and
 Edinburgh to know that controversy drives box office success, mass
 media interest and general awareness. Even if the show itself is a
 train wreck.

 So - it might be bad for the reputation of Tubefilter and the
 producers and the chances of getting sponsors for next year's  
 awards -
 but not bad for web TV. More people will hear about web shows now -
 in the knowledge that there was a big Awards ceremony for them.

 In everything I've read, everyone's giving them a pass on the tech
 problems and castigating them for the tone. Come on.

 They should be more ashamed of the tech problems than the poor  
 taste.

 I mean, they were obviously *trying* to be 'edgy'. They got what  
 they
 wanted, like ego-crazed geek frat boys. The whole thing reeks of not
 enough women in charge. What a surprise.

 But surely the one thing that should have been *flawless* is the
 technical delivery.

 It's not that hard to get sound right. You just have to hire a live
 event sound engineer who knows what they're doing - and a live
 broadcast mixer  director  engineer who know what they're doing (I
 mean, it's LA, for God's sake).

 And do rehearsals and sound checks. And if you can't do proper
 rehearsals in the venue, don't use the venue. If they were expecting
 750,000 viewers, it should have been ALL about the flawless live
 streaming of the content and perfect sound, surely - not about
 ohmygosh the Orpheum Theatre and the self-satisfied LA types in the
 room?

 And above all, given that it's about web video, it should have been
 short.

 Rupert
 http://twittervlog.tv








 On 12 Apr 2010, at 23:17, elbowsofdeath wrote

Re: [videoblogging] Streamy disaster

:)
And both in the right spirit, bringing the right attitude, more social  
 level, without the nastiness of tone  the money issues.


On 16 Apr 2010, at 00:26, Roxanne Darling wrote:

 LOL! Irina brings the drama and fun factor and I sure as hell can  
 organize.



 On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Rupert Howe rup...@twittervlog.tv  
 wrote:



 I thought earlier today that Irina should have been organising the
 Streamys. Now I realise that Irina  Rox is the dream team. Someone
 should tell them.


 On 15 Apr 2010, at 23:57, Roxanne Darling wrote:

 Irina: agreed on the dubious pay for play and it feels good to be
 recognized for hard work.
 Rupert: agree that having more women involve might have helped and
 tech
 should have been the given.
 Quirk: People are rightfully pissed. Yeah.
 Mark: Disrespecting the audience is a clear problem, I agree. If you
 are
 going to make it R-rated, it's your choice, though you better pre-
 announce
 that.

 As a group, internet video has so much potential. But many of those
 who are
 inspired to take the lead on these things also seem to have serious
 issues
 with maturity and basic event promotion competence. I produced a
 podcamp
 here in 2008 - over 400 attended live and thousands more via
 livestream.
 There were no streakers or swear words and wow what a great time we
 had!
 Aunties were blogging by the end of the 2 days and our tag hit #1 on
 Twitter
 and Flickr - from a big crowd of newbies. We did no traditional
 marketing or
 advertising - all via social networks and WOM. So I know this can
 all be
 done using the tools we love and sharing the ideas we know are
 relevant and
 in demand.

 I detached from being part of the in crowd years ago, both because
 of the
 geographical isolation in Hawaii (I just can't drop in to the LA and
 NYC
 meetings and those crowds seem to forget there are others who don't
 show up
 in the F2F events) as well as not fitting in one of the mainstream
 categories. Surely our 4+ years, 760 episodes, nearly 3 M views, and
 literally saving a few lives has a place somewhere? :-)

 Often a big fail can open things up for enlightenment. I'm putting
 my vote
 in that direction.

 Now, onto brighter and happier thoughts!

 Love,

 Rox

 On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Irina irina...@gmail.comirinaski 
 %40gmail.com
 wrote:



 chance's story showed that charging nominees for participation is a
 dubious
 undertaking -- since without nominees there would be no industry
 and no
 award show in the first place. second of all, making anyone feel
 left out
 (since this is the web, which is pretty much an all-inclusive  
 type of
 environment) with special entrances and seating is another weird
 idea.

 work on getting sponsors to pay for things so people dont have to.
 thats
 what sponsors are for. ergo, free food and liquor if i can help it.

 trust me, people brought their friends and kids to the vloggies and
 the
 winnies too. because its fun. and because it feels good to be
 recognized
 for
 hard work.


 On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Rupert Howe
 rup...@twittervlog.tv rupert%40twittervlog.tvrupert%
 40twittervlog.tv

 wrote:

 I'm also glad that it wasn't like the Oscars. LA  NY people
 consolidating their power.

 And Chance's personal story is depressing, but really... the whole
 thing reads like a Greek tragedy. Pride before the fall. I mean,  
 he
 *really* thought he was going to the Oscars?? And brought all his
 friends and colleagues... and their children?! WTF.

 And I can't agree with the It's terrible for the industry!  
 people.
 It will be *good* for the profile of web video, not bad. I've seen
 enough intentionally controversial and offensive theatre in London
 and
 Edinburgh to know that controversy drives box office success, mass
 media interest and general awareness. Even if the show itself is a
 train wreck.

 So - it might be bad for the reputation of Tubefilter and the
 producers and the chances of getting sponsors for next year's
 awards -
 but not bad for web TV. More people will hear about web shows  
 now -
 in the knowledge that there was a big Awards ceremony for them.

 In everything I've read, everyone's giving them a pass on the tech
 problems and castigating them for the tone. Come on.

 They should be more ashamed of the tech problems than the poor
 taste.

 I mean, they were obviously *trying* to be 'edgy'. They got what
 they
 wanted, like ego-crazed geek frat boys. The whole thing reeks of  
 not
 enough women in charge. What a surprise.

 But surely the one thing that should have been *flawless* is the
 technical delivery.

 It's not that hard to get sound right. You just have to hire a  
 live
 event sound engineer who knows what they're doing - and a live
 broadcast mixer  director  engineer who know what they're  
 doing (I
 mean, it's LA, for God's sake).

 And do rehearsals and sound checks. And if you can't do proper
 rehearsals in the venue, don't use the venue. If they were  
 expecting

Re: [videoblogging] Streamy disaster

2010-04-13 Thread Rupert Howe

I'm also glad that it wasn't like the Oscars.  LA  NY people  
consolidating their power.

And Chance's personal story is depressing, but really... the whole  
thing reads like a Greek tragedy.  Pride before the fall.  I mean, he  
*really* thought he was going to the Oscars?? And brought all his  
friends and colleagues... and their children?!  WTF.

And I can't agree with the It's terrible for the industry! people.   
It will be *good* for the profile of web video, not bad.  I've seen  
enough intentionally controversial and offensive theatre in London and  
Edinburgh to know that controversy drives box office success, mass  
media interest and general awareness.  Even if the show itself is a  
train wreck.

So - it might be bad for the reputation of Tubefilter and the  
producers and the chances of getting sponsors for next year's awards -  
but not bad for web TV.  More people will hear about web shows now -  
in the knowledge that there was a big Awards ceremony for them.

In everything I've read, everyone's giving them a pass on the tech  
problems and castigating them for the tone.  Come on.

They should be more ashamed of the tech problems than the poor taste.

I mean, they were obviously *trying* to be 'edgy'.  They got what they  
wanted, like ego-crazed geek frat boys.  The whole thing reeks of not  
enough women in charge.  What a surprise.

But surely the one thing that should have been *flawless* is the  
technical delivery.

It's not that hard to get sound right.  You just have to hire a live  
event sound engineer who knows what they're doing - and a live  
broadcast mixer  director  engineer who know what they're doing (I  
mean, it's LA, for God's sake).

And do rehearsals and sound checks.  And if you can't do proper  
rehearsals in the venue, don't use the venue.  If they were expecting  
750,000 viewers, it should have been ALL about the flawless live  
streaming of the content and perfect sound, surely - not about  
ohmygosh the Orpheum Theatre and the self-satisfied LA types in the  
room?

And above all, given that it's about web video, it should have been  
short.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv








On 12 Apr 2010, at 23:17, elbowsofdeath wrote:

 So I hear the Streamy's this year were a disaster in several key  
 ways and have gotten all the wrong sort of attention as a result.

 There is some concern that it has damaged the image of the  
 'industry', although it may be easy to overstate this point. It  
 certainly didnt help, but the 'industry' has enough other problems  
 too, although anything that harms potential sponsorship by appearing  
 to confirm potential sponsors worst fears (eg uncontrolled juvenile  
 amateurish smut tarnishing their brands) sounds bad to me.

 Unfortunately there is a part of me that is wildly entertained and  
 amused by the streamyfail, considering it to be some kind of justice  
 on a certain level. This isnt fair, as no doubt lots of blameless  
 hard working people have been hurt by the streamyfail, but I suppose  
 its a natural consequence of my disdain for the way some of the more  
 visible parts of the 'industry' went, shoddy emulation of the  
 existing media. What better way to symbolise two worlds colliding,  
 and so much wasted potential, than to have a slick awards show  
 humbled by technical glitches and naked people.

 Cheers

 Steve Elbows


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Happy VideoBloggingWeek2010

2010-04-12 Thread Rupert Howe

I always forget that the week starts on Sunday.  Sunday's my offline  
day.  Actually, I've just finished 6 full weeks of offline days - and  
haven't got back to my 12seconds yet, so I might crank that up again.

Twitter hashtag is #vbw2010, it seems.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 12 Apr 2010, at 03:21, David Lee King wrote:

 Me too!
 http://davidleeking.com/etc/2010/04/11/teaching-video-during-videoblogging-week-2010/-
 Sorta funny. I'm actually teaching a basics of video class to
 librarians
 in this video with agood friend of mine ... at a library conference.  
 So
 posting a video snippet of teaching video during videoblogging  
 week.
 Wow!

 David Lee King
 davidleeking.com - blog
 davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog
 twitter | skype: davidleeking

 On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 9:08 PM, ryanne hodson ryanne.hod...@gmail.com 
 wrote:

  hey i made a video too!
 
  http://ryanedit.blogspot.com/2010/04/videoblogging-week-2010-sunday.html
 
 
  -ryanne
 
  --
  http://RyanIsHungry.com
  Twitter: http://twitter.com/ryanne
  AIM: VideoRodeo
 
 
  On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 6:41 PM, mgmoon mgm...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
  
   That's the whole idea. VBW challenges people to come up with a  
 video per
   day in one week. It might not be pretty, but another snippet in  
 time has
   been captured.
  
   I watched your video... and I thought it was wonderful.
   Thanks for sharing.
  
   Mike
   http://vlog.mikemoon.net
  
   --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging 
 %40yahoogroups.com,
   compumavengal compumaven...@... wrote:
   
I stumble in but I got one up. It ain't pretty but it is done.
   
  
  http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com/2010/04/videoblogging-day-1-2010-lemonade.html
   
Gena
http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com
   
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging 
 %40yahoogroups.com
  ,
   mgmoon mgmoon@ wrote:

 Well, it's Sunday.
 It starts today... Videobloggingweek2010.
 April 11-17

 Grab your camcorders and shoot some video.

 Mike
 http://vlog.mikemoon.net

 p.s. Here's Day 1's vlog:
 http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2010/04/11/geo-fricken-caching/

   
  
  
  
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
 
 
  
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Happy VideoBloggingWeek2010

2010-04-12 Thread Rupert Howe

I always forget that the week starts on Sunday.  Sunday's my offline  
day.  Actually, I've just finished 6 full weeks of offline days - and  
haven't got back to my 12seconds yet, so I might crank that up again.

Twitter hashtag is #vbw2010, it seems.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 12 Apr 2010, at 03:21, David Lee King wrote:

 Me too!
 http://davidleeking.com/etc/2010/04/11/teaching-video-during-videoblogging-week-2010/-
 Sorta funny. I'm actually teaching a basics of video class to
 librarians
 in this video with agood friend of mine ... at a library conference.  
 So
 posting a video snippet of teaching video during videoblogging  
 week.
 Wow!

 David Lee King
 davidleeking.com - blog
 davidleeking.com/etc - videoblog
 twitter | skype: davidleeking

 On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 9:08 PM, ryanne hodson ryanne.hod...@gmail.com 
 wrote:

  hey i made a video too!
 
  http://ryanedit.blogspot.com/2010/04/videoblogging-week-2010-sunday.html
 
 
  -ryanne
 
  --
  http://RyanIsHungry.com
  Twitter: http://twitter.com/ryanne
  AIM: VideoRodeo
 
 
  On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 6:41 PM, mgmoon mgm...@yahoo.com wrote:
 
  
  
   That's the whole idea. VBW challenges people to come up with a  
 video per
   day in one week. It might not be pretty, but another snippet in  
 time has
   been captured.
  
   I watched your video... and I thought it was wonderful.
   Thanks for sharing.
  
   Mike
   http://vlog.mikemoon.net
  
   --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging 
 %40yahoogroups.com,
   compumavengal compumaven...@... wrote:
   
I stumble in but I got one up. It ain't pretty but it is done.
   
  
  http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com/2010/04/videoblogging-day-1-2010-lemonade.html
   
Gena
http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com
   
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging 
 %40yahoogroups.com
  ,
   mgmoon mgmoon@ wrote:

 Well, it's Sunday.
 It starts today... Videobloggingweek2010.
 April 11-17

 Grab your camcorders and shoot some video.

 Mike
 http://vlog.mikemoon.net

 p.s. Here's Day 1's vlog:
 http://mikemoon.net/vlog/2010/04/11/geo-fricken-caching/

   
  
  
  
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
 
 
  
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Check week at blip.tv

Congratulations!

On 9 Apr 2010, at 02:28, David Jones wrote:


 I just hit my first anniversary video blogging too.

 Dave.

 _


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Check week at blip.tv

It's always about context, isn't it?  I'm used to seeing adverts on  
videos now, but rarely even notice them.  It's usually when they're  
getting in the way or are inappropriate that I notice them - and  
that's not a good thing.
That said, I think there are quite a lot of people making reasonable  
pocket money from blogs and videos.  If you're into making videos that  
other people want to watch, and you can build an audience, there's  
some money there.

TubeMogul did a survey of their web video producers last year, and  
found that on average they got $12 per 1000 views.  Which is in line  
with an average ad price across different media of $10-15 per thousand  
impressions.

Last month was my 5 year vlogiversary, and over that 5 years I've had  
around a million views of my videoblog posts on different sites.  So  
that'd have been about $12,000 over five years if I'd run adverts.   
Which would be better than a kick in the face, but not exactly a  
living wage.  And the presence of adverts would most definitely not  
have fitted with almost any of my content.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 9 Apr 2010, at 13:24, Jay dedman wrote:

  I don't know about Blip, but as I've mentioned before, I'm a  
 Youtube partner and I certainly make money from it, as I do from  
 Google ads on my blog site.
  I'm not allowed to say how much, but it's not insignificant. Not
  enough to live off to be sure, but I've only got several thousand
  regular viewers.
  If you extrapolate, and my audience increased say 10 fold, I could  
 probably do it full time and make a meager living.
  I know another video blogger who has roughly those audience  
 figures, and he has mentioned that within the next year he might  
 take it full-time if growth continues.
  I just hit my first anniversary video blogging too.

 It's been good to hear your past experience. I believe blip focuses on
 ads INSIDE the video (either pre-roll, mid-roll, or post-roll)...not
 sure if Youtube does this. Ive wondered if people are out off by ads
 in videos they watch. Text ads on the page seem easy enough to ignore.
 Is anyone here a blip partner?

 Does Youtube or blip make you sign a exclusive contract with them...or
 can you put the same content in both places to collect two checks?
 Just wondering how all this plays out.

 Dave, huge congrats on the first year anniversary.

 jay

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Check week at blip.tv

That old video of yours about your mum - interrupted with your Coke ad  
- springs to mind, Jay - is that still online somewhere?

On 9 Apr 2010, at 13:47, Rupert Howe wrote:

 It's always about context, isn't it?  I'm used to seeing adverts on
 videos now, but rarely even notice them.  It's usually when they're
 getting in the way or are inappropriate that I notice them - and
 that's not a good thing.
 That said, I think there are quite a lot of people making reasonable
 pocket money from blogs and videos.  If you're into making videos that
 other people want to watch, and you can build an audience, there's
 some money there.

 TubeMogul did a survey of their web video producers last year, and
 found that on average they got $12 per 1000 views.  Which is in line
 with an average ad price across different media of $10-15 per thousand
 impressions.

 Last month was my 5 year vlogiversary, and over that 5 years I've had
 around a million views of my videoblog posts on different sites.  So
 that'd have been about $12,000 over five years if I'd run adverts.
 Which would be better than a kick in the face, but not exactly a
 living wage.  And the presence of adverts would most definitely not
 have fitted with almost any of my content.

 Rupert
 http://twittervlog.tv

 On 9 Apr 2010, at 13:24, Jay dedman wrote:

 I don't know about Blip, but as I've mentioned before, I'm a
 Youtube partner and I certainly make money from it, as I do from
 Google ads on my blog site.
 I'm not allowed to say how much, but it's not insignificant. Not
 enough to live off to be sure, but I've only got several thousand
 regular viewers.
 If you extrapolate, and my audience increased say 10 fold, I could
 probably do it full time and make a meager living.
 I know another video blogger who has roughly those audience
 figures, and he has mentioned that within the next year he might
 take it full-time if growth continues.
 I just hit my first anniversary video blogging too.

 It's been good to hear your past experience. I believe blip focuses  
 on
 ads INSIDE the video (either pre-roll, mid-roll, or post-roll)...not
 sure if Youtube does this. Ive wondered if people are out off by ads
 in videos they watch. Text ads on the page seem easy enough to  
 ignore.
 Is anyone here a blip partner?

 Does Youtube or blip make you sign a exclusive contract with  
 them...or
 can you put the same content in both places to collect two checks?
 Just wondering how all this plays out.

 Dave, huge congrats on the first year anniversary.

 jay





 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Check week at blip.tv

I'm really happy that you've made it work.  A year ago or so I was  
really starting to doubt whether anybody would make any money except  
the big boys (again) - particularly with all the new hardware and  
closed distribution channels emerging.
So it's very exciting that there are indie producers making hundreds  
of thousands.   And that you at Blip have succeeded while always  
trying to do the right thing.  Great work!  :)

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 9 Apr 2010, at 16:26, mikehudack wrote:

 Thought I'd chime in about this.

 Blip.tv's mission is to make independent shows sustainable. We do  
 this by providing what we call services of scale: technology,  
 workflow automation, distribution and business development and ad  
 sales. The theory is that most independent shows are too small to  
 have all those things in house. So what we do is we aggregate a  
 bunch of shows together (about 50,000 at last count) and provide  
 those services to all of them at the same time.

 Our Dashboard is a key part of this (check out http://blip.tv/tour/  
 if you're not familiar). Our sales team is, too. We have a full  
 nationwide sales team -- seven people -- plus two people in London.  
 Our sales team is in London, Chicago, San Francisco and LA, Texas  
 and New York. They sell bundles of shows to clients like General  
 Motors, ATT, Samsung, Chili's, Best Buy and a bunch of others. We  
 run those ads across our network and split the revenue 50/50 with  
 show creators.

 We pay quarterly. This quarter we sent out a record number of checks  
 and PayPal payments. Overall we sent out 25% more money than we did  
 last quarter. A lot of smaller shows are getting smaller checks --  
 $25, $100, $200... and bigger shows are getting really big checks.  
 Tens of thousands of dollars. There are now shows that use blip that  
 are making hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

 We're still at the beginning, but we're at the point now where there  
 are more than a few shows out there with full-time creators. People  
 who have quit their jobs and are making shows full-time. And there  
 will be more next month, and more the month after that.

 We're really excited about what's happening. We're seeing a new  
 industry emerge. Television networks and big studios have dominated  
 video creation for sixty years -- ever since NBC debuted at the 1939  
 Worlds Fair. For the first time in generations it's possible for  
 talented and driven folks to set out on their own and create their  
 masterpieces and do it for a living.

 Let me know if you guys have any questions about our services, ad  
 sales, payments, whatever. Happy to answer any and all questions  
 you've got -- skeptical or not. We're an open book. The only thing I  
 can't talk about is how much specific shows made. That's their  
 confidential information and up to them to decide whether or not to  
 share.

 Yours,

 Mike
 Co-founder  CEO, blip.tv

 --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman jay.ded...@...  
 wrote:
 
  This blog post says blip.tv sent a bunch of checks to show  
 creators. I
  know some folks here are also Youtube partners. It would be really
  great if independent producers are really getting paid.
  http://theblog.blip.tv/post/505915181/this-week-is-check-week-at-blip-tv-were-sending
 
  I wonder if you can post shows on Youtube and blip...getting paid  
 for
  both. Are they exclusive?
  I also cant believe that ads actually work.
 
  If anyone here has experience as partners on blip/youtube, love to
  hear more info.
 
  Jay
 
  --
  http://ryanishungry.com
  http://twitter.com/jaydedman
  917 371 6790
 


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] Job at PCF/Miro

http://worcester.craigslist.org/web/1684265692.html

Participatory Culture Foundation (creator of Miro - getmiro.com) is  
looking to fill a part-time web and technical role. We are an open- 
source, non-profit software development organization.

Our organization has strong technical and design capabilities, but we  
need additional hands on deck to keep our websites up to date. This  
job will entail taking on various projects to update, revise, and  
maintain our websites.


REQUIREMENTS

Above all, we are looking for someone who is extremely reliable and  
consistent and has strong html + css skills.

Please let us know if you have any of the following skills. None are  
required, but may be helpful:

- Familiarity with SVN or Git
- Javascript experience
- PHP experience
- Other programming experience
- Design skills
- Experience with open-source or free culture projects

Send a resume and a brief introductory note to: nicho...@pculture.org

Pay will be hourly, depending on experience. For more about our  
organization, please visit pculture.org

Thanks!

Location: telecommute
Compensation: based on experience
Telecommuting is ok.
This is a part-time job. 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Vloggercue 2010

I think that weekend would be the third anniversary of Pixelodeon.   
Which seems like a scarily long time.I'm pretty sure I came back  
from Pixelodeon thinking that we were all going to change the world.   
Much has happened since then... but not that.  Yet.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 9 Apr 2010, at 16:18, Adam Quirk wrote:

 http://vloggercue.blogspot.com/2010/04/bushwick-starr.html

 http://vloggercue.blogspot.com/2010/04/bushwick-starr.htmlLocation
 secured, working on dates. Shooting for Saturday June 19th. Will  
 confirm
 when I know for sure.

 On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Adam Quirk  
 qu...@wreckandsalvage.comwrote:

  It's official then, if Randy is coming this will be a real party.
 
 
  On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 4:23 PM, RANDY MANN themaddm...@gmail.com  
 wrote:
 
  mu bbq im in
 
  On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Jay dedman jay.ded...@gmail.com  
 wrote:
 
  
  
I'm heading to a Brooklyn events space tonight at 6:30 to start
  planning
Vloggercue 2010.
The only details I have right now are that it will be in  
 June, in
   Brooklyn,
and free. As in free beer, free food, free video screening,  
 free
  music,
   free
love.
After tonight I'll have more details to share.
http://vloggercue.blogspot.com/
  
   Ryanne and I will make it up this year. Easy reason to visit NYC
   again. We havent had a good videoblogging hang out in a long  
 time.
  
   Jay
  
   --
   http://ryanishungry.com
   http://twitter.com/jaydedman
   917 371 6790
  
  
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
 
 
  
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 
 

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode  
mono  stereo videomics?   I know they're popular with videobloggers.

Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

here's another general question for the audiophiles like Richard - is  
there really much difference between a mono and a stereo mic at this  
level?  surely in most cases - recording someone talking, or capturing  
general atmos for instance, both channels will be almost exactly the  
same?  and the range and response isn't improved by having stereo, is  
it?  what am i missing?


On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:30, Rupert Howe wrote:

 Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode
 mono  stereo videomics? I know they're popular with videobloggers.


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

excellent - i can have a thread all to myself.
well, Rupert, it seems to me after a moment's consideration that the  
Stereo videomic is probably better for atmosphere and group  
discussions, whereas the more directional mono videomic would be  
better for interview use.  does that sound right?
Yes, Rupert, that would seem to make sense.
Thanks.
No problem.

On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:37, Rupert Howe wrote:

 here's another general question for the audiophiles like Richard - is
 there really much difference between a mono and a stereo mic at this
 level?  surely in most cases - recording someone talking, or capturing
 general atmos for instance, both channels will be almost exactly the
 same?  and the range and response isn't improved by having stereo, is
 it?  what am i missing?


 On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:30, Rupert Howe wrote:

 Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode
 mono  stereo videomics? I know they're popular with videobloggers.






 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

That didn't even occur to me.  Nice tip.

On 31 Mar 2010, at 13:04, Quirk wrote:

 Hey Ruperts, one advantage to stereo is having a backup channel for  
 loud situations. Live music for example. You set one channel at a  
 reasonable level, and set the other maybe 6db below it. That way if  
 you get any crazy peaks you can just delete the standard channel  
 during that scene and double up your backup.
 AQ
 Sent via dynamic wireless technology device

 -Original Message-
 From: Rupert Howe rup...@twittervlog.tv
 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:51:41
 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
 Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

 excellent - i can have a thread all to myself.
 well, Rupert, it seems to me after a moment's consideration that the
 Stereo videomic is probably better for atmosphere and group
 discussions, whereas the more directional mono videomic would be
 better for interview use. does that sound right?
 Yes, Rupert, that would seem to make sense.
 Thanks.
 No problem.

 On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:37, Rupert Howe wrote:

  here's another general question for the audiophiles like Richard -  
 is
  there really much difference between a mono and a stereo mic at this
  level? surely in most cases - recording someone talking, or  
 capturing
  general atmos for instance, both channels will be almost exactly the
  same? and the range and response isn't improved by having stereo, is
  it? what am i missing?
 
 
  On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:30, Rupert Howe wrote:
 
  Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode
  mono  stereo videomics? I know they're popular with videobloggers.
 
 
 
 
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
 
 
  
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links




 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

Hey Rupert, here's a video where Gene Fama gives a great comparison of  
the two mics in action on a 5D Mk2, which I think is the camera you're  
thinking of attaching it to, isn't it?
http://vimeo.com/2707206

On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:51, Rupert Howe wrote:

 excellent - i can have a thread all to myself.
 well, Rupert, it seems to me after a moment's consideration that the
 Stereo videomic is probably better for atmosphere and group
 discussions, whereas the more directional mono videomic would be
 better for interview use. does that sound right?
 Yes, Rupert, that would seem to make sense.
 Thanks.
 No problem.

 On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:37, Rupert Howe wrote:

  here's another general question for the audiophiles like Richard -  
 is
  there really much difference between a mono and a stereo mic at this
  level? surely in most cases - recording someone talking, or  
 capturing
  general atmos for instance, both channels will be almost exactly the
  same? and the range and response isn't improved by having stereo, is
  it? what am i missing?
 
 
  On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:30, Rupert Howe wrote:
 
  Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode
  mono  stereo videomics? I know they're popular with videobloggers.
 
 
 
 
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
 
 
  
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Rode Videomic versus Rode Stereomic

Thanks Tom - don't feel shy about adding your podcast URL as a  
signature, for our easy access.
I usually do (so do most people here, I think) I was just being lazy  
today because I was talking to myself.

Rupert and Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 31 Mar 2010, at 19:04, Tom Dolan wrote:

 Hi Rupert,

 If I can break into this conversation between you andRupert, I'd
 like to say that in the situation you're describing, I don't think
 stereo audio is an issue. I capture my video podcast audio with a mono
 lavaliere and convert with QT Pro and the results are  very good. The
 audio goes in as mono but comes out as mono in both channels. You can
 check my podcast
 if you like and hear for yourself. I've just opened it up so it still
 needs some content but please check it out. Stereo in the field could
 be a complication you could easily avoid and I would unless the
 situation demanded otherwise.

 Good Listening  Good Luck, and now feel free to continue your
 conversation with Rupert.

 Tom Dolan


 On Mar 31, 2010, at 4:51 AM, Rupert Howe wrote:

 excellent - i can have a thread all to myself.
 well, Rupert, it seems to me after a moment's consideration that the
 Stereo videomic is probably better for atmosphere and group
 discussions, whereas the more directional mono videomic would be
 better for interview use. does that sound right?
 Yes, Rupert, that would seem to make sense.
 Thanks.
 No problem.

 On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:37, Rupert Howe wrote:

 here's another general question for the audiophiles like Richard -
 is
 there really much difference between a mono and a stereo mic at this
 level? surely in most cases - recording someone talking, or
 capturing
 general atmos for instance, both channels will be almost exactly the
 same? and the range and response isn't improved by having stereo, is
 it? what am i missing?


 On 31 Mar 2010, at 12:30, Rupert Howe wrote:

 Does anybody have any experience comparing the quality of the Rode
 mono  stereo videomics? I know they're popular with videobloggers.






 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links








 Tom Dolan
 tomjdo...@gmail.com





 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [videoblogging] German vloggers before 2005

2010-03-24 Thread Rupert Howe

Newteevee did a recap of the last decade in online video - makes for  
interesting and nostalgic reading:
http://newteevee.com/2010/01/01/the-decade-in-online-video-part-1-the-early-years/

On 24 Mar 2010, at 00:32, Jay dedman wrote:

  I have been searching for a while but with little success. Is  
 within our group any German vlogger who had started his vlog before  
 2005? The only one I could find is greenhorn and now I try to  
 contact him via email and maybe now it works via our group...
  But has anyone a hint for me? Or hadn't there existed any German  
 videoblogs before that time?

 Hey Jenna--

 To be honest, there weren't any vloggers really anywhere before 2004.
 People experimented with posting video online, but Adrian Miles was
 the only person I found who had used a blog to post videos on any kind
 of regular basis.

 Ive never heard of greenhorn.

 Jay

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Video Blogging Week 2010

2010-03-24 Thread Rupert Howe

Bring it on.

On 24 Mar 2010, at 12:21, mgmoon wrote:

 Okay folks, get those camcorders outta the closet and prepare to  
 shoot 7 videos in 7 days.

 Come on... take a couple minutes and write down some ideas.
 You have a couple weeks before it starts.

 I know you can do it! get involved. Be a playa.

 Here's some ideas. Please feel free to add to the list.
 Show your special talent (underarm farts, whistle, touch forehead  
 with tongue, whatever)
 Do you have a passion?
 How do you spend your pastime?
 Read a good book lately? Review it.
 Got a tattoo no one has seen...yet?
 12seconds.tv has a daily challenge.
 Sing a song.
 What's for dinner?
 Do a dance.
 Get naked.
 Give the camcorder to your kids.
 Pull out a box of old pictures. Tell the stories, capture the history.
 Film your lawn or garden. A point in history.
 Capture pet moments.
 Lip-sync a song.

 Help your fellow content-challenged fellow vloggers with some ideas.

 Come on you wusses. 7 videos... no rules! Anything goes! Free For All!

 Mike
 http://vlog.mikemoon.net

 VLOG ON BITCHES

 --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Josh Leo josh...@... wrote:
 
  The dates are set, prepare yourself, start forming ideas for  
 videos, and get
  ready to pose 1 video a day for 7 days!
 
  http://www.videobloggingweek2010.blogspot.com
 
  --
  Josh Leo
 
  www.JoshLeo.com
  www.SlowLorisMedia.com
  www.WanderingWestMichigan.com
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Mefeedia State of the Vlogosphere 2010

2010-03-01 Thread Rupert Howe

Yes, I posted about it on 22 Jan - nobody replied.  There's some good  
stuff there.

Particularly things like that the average watch time for a short form  
video online is 1:15.

And that YouTube is only 36% of all video tracked by Mefeedia.
Blip and Vimeo combined are 23%.
Which obviously leaves a quite significant 41% divided between other  
sources.

The average vlogger syndicates to 3.6 sites.

Playstation 3 and the Wii are the big players in video via TV at the  
moment.

On 2 Mar 2010, at 03:50, compumavengal wrote:

 Not sure if folks saw this or not. I searched the archives and  
 didn't see a mention. http://blog.mefeedia.com/vlog-2010

 Also mentioned at Tech Crunch
 http://techcrunch.com/2010/01/05/mefeedia-state-of-the-vlogosphere-2010/

 Gena
 http://createvideonotebook.blogspot.com/


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Veoh is dead

2010-02-19 Thread Rupert Howe

It's not unlike TV, really.  There are thousands of bad channels, a  
lot of shitty formats, and a small amount of shows of real quality.

In terms of availability of IPTV, and the development of web TV, it's  
like TV was back in the mid 1940s.

The money and infrastructure in TV allows the development of quality  
drama and comedy, which is a really hard thing to achieve (even in cop  
show  sitcom formats).

In TV, huge systems are in place to support and promote good drama.   
Periodically, TV drama production comes under attack from insecure  
executives - and so drama shifts from channel to channel (HBO has had  
a good decade for instance) but if you look at the machinery behind  
even a mediocre soap, it's massive.  Writers, script editors,  
producers, commissioning editors, channel controllers, schedulers,  
directors, performers, technicians, marketing departments.

At some level, all these people - at the top of their professions -  
are all giving input to find the best material and iron out the creases.

I don't know how independent web producers are ever going to replicate  
this level of infrastructure and support - I'm trying to figure that  
out.  But as much as some of us might feel squirmy about awards  
ceremonies, I think the Streamys help a lot by pointing out the good  
stuff.   Otherwise, where do we look to find it?  Meanwhile, the age  
of widespread IPTV is speeding towards us.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 19 Feb 2010, at 21:09, Adam Quirk wrote:

 You're awesome Rox. Thanks for persevering and doing what you love.

 You are a great example to point to when people start out in this
 medium, or any medium actually. Some people get into something like
 web video or blogging and make something for a couple months, then get
 frustrated when nobody is paying them $100k for their work. As 99% of
 newcomers drop off after a few weeks or months because of their
 unfulfilled feelings of entitlement, the people who are really
 passionate push on and keep doing what they love regardless of
 financial reward.

 bitter As to Sull's points, there's a much larger quantity of
 creators these days, I agree, but the percentage of good stuff to bad
 stuff has not increased with the level of technology. The signal to
 noise is obviously much worse than when there were 100 of us making
 stuff. And the quality has suffered due to an influx of Hollywood
 types trying to stuff Hollywood productions into a web video box.
 Which usually doesn't work because they are generally out of work in
 the first place because they weren't very good at their jobs in
 Hollywood, and even if they were, that doesn't translate very well on
 the web. That translation problem could soon be a thing of the past
 since everything will be funneled to our TVs in the coming years, but
 it still doesn't solve the problem of bad writing and acting.
 /bitter

 Disclosure: I am a Streamys judge and IAWTV member. There is some damn
 good material out there. It's not easy to find. The technical arts are
 on par with the best TV and Hollywood. The writing/acting stuff needs
 a lot of work.

 --

 Adam Quirk
 http://wreckandsalvage.com

 On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Roxanne Darling oke...@gmail.com  
 wrote:
  I am enjoying reading all these comments - though my head is like a
  ping pong ball banging back and forth as I agree with virtually  
 all of
  the statements!
 
  Most of all though I have had a lifelong irritation with virtually
  every industry I have worked in that values the stuff more than the
  people. Conferences will pay for fancy programs and glitch and glam
  yet want speakers to pay their own way. Businesses will spend  
 $40,000
  on a one seat bathroom, and kvetch about a website that costs $5000
  (that is a real example from one of our earlier clients.) Velvet  
 seats
  for the theatre and fancy cocktail parties for the donors yet the
  ballerinas make pennies. So that prob is nothing for us to feel
  special about. :-)
 
  Our show is approaching it's 4th anniversary - we were late to the
  party but there is still energy there I cannot define. At it's root,
  people feel good when they watch it.  For me, after 757 episodes, it
  still has meaning, and we still have ideas, but it is much harder to
  find the time. We've had almost no sponsorship or financial  
 support in
  the entire term.
 
  Anyway, I just posted the first thing in several weeks - it's a nice
  oddball show that speaks to the videoblog sensibility not the hulu
  one, that I hope might help you feel good too.
  http://www.beachwalks.tv/2010/02/15/beach-walk-757-waves-washing-over-us/
 
  Though I really do like watching 30Rock on hulu from the laptop  
 while
  cooking dinner!
 
  Love,
 
  Rox
 
 
  On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Michael Sullivan sullele...@gmail.com 
  wrote:
  i dont think their is much getting around the fact that making  
 good money
  with web video 'shows' is extremely difficult and frustrating

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Remember when it was all 320x240?

2010-02-11 Thread Rupert Howe


On 10 Feb 2010, at 23:57, David Jones wrote:
 Sure, but that whole argument is such a big red herring and so
 entirely beside the point it's not funny!

His argument was not beside the point.  It was about people using  
videoblogging for more than talking to the camera.  Which is what  
quite a lot of people here do.

 Almost every video blogger *wants* the best possibly quality video
 they can get, they aren't keeping it small for some artistic reason.
 They keep it small because they are (or think they are) constrained by
 some technical limitation.

Almost every video blogger?  Care to back this up a little?  It's just  
not true.  In my experience, most people videoblogging are using  
what's convenient to them.  Whether it's an iSight or their phone  
camera or the camera they happen to have.   And a balance of cost to  
convenience.  Remember all the trouble you had cutting H264 MP4

And then there are the many many filmmakers you dismiss as 'arty  
farty', quite a few of whom (like me) do not just want to rack up the  
pixel count so that we can have massive resolution.  As I explained  
before (no response?) - for a *lot* of reasons.  Aesthetics, ease,  
storage, bandwidth, cutting, etc etc ETC.


 Deliberately limiting your source material because you have some
 preconceived notion about how it should be viewed, is in my view a
 silly thing to do.

?!

 But hey, if you want to go all arty-farty and shoot
 small, be my guest, just don't argue that's even close to what most
 video bloggers want, you'd be way off the mark.

Equally, please don't argue that you know what most video bloggers  
want.  You'd be way off the mark.  And 'arty farty'??


  All power to full screen video, but please don't make an argument  
 that
  this is the only way to approach video online.

 I'm not.
 I'm simply saying that any videoblogger should be making use of the
 best possible resolution they can easily do.

Finally - everything Adrian and I have said is about why they can do  
whatever they want - not because they *should* be doing anything.   
There are a lot more things at play here than just shooting at the  
best possible resolution.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Remember when it was all 320x240?

2010-02-11 Thread Rupert Howe

Good story :)

I used this argument last time we had the HD discussion - it died  
without comment, except from Adam.

Apart from the waste of energy  unnecessary cost that someone will  
have to pick up somewhere, we *will* face repercussions from  
unnecessary use of huge HD video files.

Cisco reported in June 2009 that:
Internet video is now approximately one-third of all consumer  
Internet traffic, not including the amount of video exchanged through  
P2P file sharing.
The sum of all forms of video (TV, video on demand, Internet, and P2P)  
will account for over 91 percent of global consumer traffic by 2013.  
Internet video alone will account for over 60 percent of all consumer  
Internet traffic in 2013.
My ISP here in our London office has started throttling our ADSL  
broadband - presumably because we use lots of video.  Upload speeds  
have died - it took me 45 minutes to upload a 30mb video yesterday.
It's been happening every day for the last month - our usage goes up,  
the speeds die.  We're supposed to have 10mbps unlimited bandwidth  
connection.  And the ISP (not my choice) is the main telecom company  
here: BT, who control the network.

A sign of things to come.

I have heard that speeds are also an issue in Australia (where Adrian  
and Dave both are) - and a friend in South Africa tells me that  
streaming YouTube videos is a problem, even in downtown Johannesburg.

Certainly, in my book this is another big reason why it's not OK to  
tell people they shouldn't be shooting in low resolutions.  If you  
don't need to use HD (and why do you need to use HD for personal /  
family videoblogging like Adam  I do?) then using it is akin to using  
a gas guzzling SUV to do the school run.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 11 Feb 2010, at 10:11, Adrian Miles wrote:

 hi all

 On 11/02/2010, at 8:13 PM, adammerc...@att.net wrote:

  Also there is the question of bandwidth and I've had this argument
  with several people, and I'm often in the minority. But i believe my
  position so I stand by it. Bandwidth is not free, contrary to
  popular opinion. Someone somewhere is paying for it. We wil all pay
  for it if the ISPs want to throttle their networks thanks to every
  tom dick and harry publishing HD video of their son on a swing, thus
  choking up the networks with unnecessary bits. your content may very
  well warrant the higher quality. Thats your choice. Miine does not.
  Thats my choice.

 really want to second this. In a world where sustainability really is
 an issue network sustainability (which includes bandwidth) *is*
 significant. You can't pump big video into most of the world. For some
 projects that does not matter, but for many it does. I remember
 teaching Masters students in Norway who scoffed at what I showed them
 in QuickTime for compression and editing, pointing out that downstairs
 they had Avids, 3 chip cameras etc. Half of these students were on
 scholarships from the developing world. I asked them so, when you go
 home and out to a school, do you want everyone to be able to shoot and
 edit and publish video for a $30 bit of software, or do you want to
 tell them that they can only tell their stories when they learn how to
 use, own, maintain, an Avid? Every one of them shut up and started
 playing. Today I could have the same conversation with them about
 bandwidth.

 cheers
 Adrian Miles
 adrian.mi...@rmit.edu.au
 Program Director, Bachelor of Communication Honours
 vogmae.net.au/research/contact-me/


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Remember when it was all 320x240?

2010-02-11 Thread Rupert Howe

OK, this is my last post on this subject, because you haven't engaged  
with any of my arguments.

But I must point out that you've changed your opinion from the  
statement that started all this in the first place.

You just said to Adam:
 Once again, I was speaking about low res in general, not about you or
 your circumstances personally.

and:
 I did read it and I knew that you chose to downscale to 640x480.
 Nothing wrong with that, that's your choice, and I'd probably do the
 same thing if I deemed the quality was not acceptable at 640x480.


But the whole reason this discussion started in the first place was  
because your original comment was:

 Adam:
  Call me old school, but I still publish my vlog in 320x240. For a  
 couple of reasons. My old Flip shoots at 640x480 and at the native  
 size its pretty crummy. Scaled to quarter screen it tightens up and  
 cleans up the noise considerably.
 
  Also theres nothing in my vlog that needs to be seen at HD  
 resolution. Waste of bandwidth.

 David:
 If you follow that logic to its logical conclusion, then why have a
 video blog at all?, why not just an audio podcast?
 Or at least why not 160x120 for even more bandwidth saving and  
 speed?  A video blog should be all about the video (ok audio is super
 important too, but beside the point), the bigger and more glorious the
 source material the better. Try watching 320x240 full screen...
 I know people who watch my video blog like a TV show and put it on
 full screen while having their breakfast etc.

Nothing about it being fine for Adam to shoot in low res.   I shoot  
in 320  why have a video blog at all.

That's why I replied.

I'm sort of frustrated with your implication that my response has been  
to take this personally - it is purely a reaction to your general  
statement about what people (or Adam) should not be doing.

Once again (yawn) my point is that it's not enough just to tell  
everyone they should shoot in as high a resolution as possible.  There  
are *many* good reasons people shoot small, which I've set out  
numerous times.I've taken time to spell them out.  To have a  
discussion.  Any acknowledgement?

Anyway - enough already.  I hope you remember that I think your vlog  
is awesome, and this is *not* some kind of personal thing as you  
implied.  Just if anyone says why have a video blog at all to i  
shoot in 320, you can bet I'm going to reply, fairly vigorously.  To  
anyone, in whatever forum.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv






On 11 Feb 2010, at 21:09, David Jones wrote:


 Go for your life, I can handle it, I stand by my comments.
 Many people take what I say personally, or mistakenly think I'm
 personally attacking them in some way, that's sad. My comments are
 meant for general discussion and food for thought.

  If you bothered to read my original post before getting your  
 pompous high and might knickers in a twist you'd have noticed that I  
 too share this marvelous thing you call CHOICE.

 I did read it and I knew that you chose to downscale to 640x480.
 Nothing wrong with that, that's your choice, and I'd probably do the
 same thing if I deemed the quality was not acceptable at 640x480. In
 fact, from memory I think I did do that on my first blog with a web
 cam.
 Once again, I was speaking about low res in general, not about you or
 your circumstances personally.

  I dont 'film' at 320x240. In fact i dont 'film' at all, and  
 neither do you. Get your technicalities right before you bandy silly  
 ideas around. You shoot video, so technically you record.

 Perfectly common usage, you knew what I mean, and I'm sure everyone
 else did too.
 So what's your point?, that my comments somehow have less validity
 because I chose to use the term film instead of shoot?
 I'll call it what I want, thank you very much.

 So my idea of advising people to at least film (sorry, shoot) and if
 possible upload at the best quality they reasonably can do so users
 have a choice is silly? YouTube recommend it too, so please do
 explain how that's silly...

 And as I've said I'm also an advocate of optimising your downloads for
 certain needs like podcasting etc. I do it myself. But I don't *only*
 upload at 320x240, because I know people like to view my blog in many
 different ways, and my blog is mostly a talking head that can be
 viewed adequately at 320x240. So I give them a choice and upload the
 best material I have available.

  And I RECORD my video at 640x480. I CHOOSE to downscale to 320x240  
 because my expert eye has determined that the image looks better  
 that way. It benefits from the reduced noise and softened image.

 Sure, you'll get no argument from me.

  My full frame 480p image is captured on a $100 flip, whereas your  
 image is captured on a $400 HD cam. If i were shooting content that  
 I thought worthy of such a camera I would certainly invest in one. I  
 own a professional miniDV camera that captures quite a nice full  
 frame image, but I dont

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Remember when it was all 320x240?

2010-02-10 Thread Rupert Howe



TOTALLY disagree, but you know this already from earlier discussions.

You are doing a very different kind of videoblog from what most people  
do - it's great that you love doing it in HD, but I really really  
strongly disagree that Any video blogger who is filming and/or  
uploading in 320x240 only is doing their effort a real disservice I  
think.

As for If you follow that logic to its logical conclusion, then why  
have a video blog at all?, why not just an audio podcast? Or at least  
why not 160x120 for even more bandwidth saving and speed? -  
R

As someone who has posted hundreds of videos in 320x240 for just short  
of 5 years now, I'm not a podcaster.   320x240 videos are clearly  
visible and can be *great* quality - unlike 160x120.   Remember, TV is  
only 480 lines high.

It's about the *content*, not the size of the window or the number of  
pixels.  Particularly for videoblogging.  And there's actually a lot  
of benefit to be had from working with lofi, non HD technology - apart  
from aesthetically, there are benefits for file storage, cutting,  
upload and transmission.

Especially when most people watch most video embedded somewhere  
between 320 and 640.

For a whole bunch of reasons, I wouldn't be videoblogging if I had to  
do everything in HD.  I'm still posting 320x240 via 12seconds every  
day - and other people may not see the point in what I do, but I love  
it.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



On 10 Feb 2010, at 07:49, David Jones wrote:

 On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:19 PM, adammerc...@att.net
 adammerc...@att.net wrote:
 
  Call me old school, but I still publish my vlog in 320x240. For a  
 couple of reasons. My old Flip shoots at 640x480 and at the native  
 size its pretty crummy. Scaled to quarter screen it tightens up and  
 cleans up the noise considerably.
 
  Also theres nothing in my vlog that needs to be seen at HD  
 resolution. Waste of bandwidth.

 If you follow that logic to its logical conclusion, then why have a
 video blog at all?, why not just an audio podcast?
 Or at least why not 160x120 for even more bandwidth saving and speed?

 A video blog should be all about the video (ok audio is super
 important too, but beside the point), the bigger and more glorious the
 source material the better. Try watching 320x240 full screen...
 I know people who watch my video blog like a TV show and put it on
 full screen while having their breakfast etc.

 The beauty of modern hosts like YouTube are that it offers whatever
 resolution the user desires. Defaults to 360p to save bandwidth, but
 offers selectable 480p, 720p, or higher for those who chose it.
 I now always shoot and upload in 1280x720 because:
 a) I have the camera that can do it
 b) People have different needs (and bandwidth isn't an issue for
 probably the majority of people these days)
 c) And you never know what the future holds. I didn't want to look
 back in a few years and wish I had shot those previous hundred
 episodes in HD for whatever reason.

 Any video blogger who is filming and/or uploading in 320x240 only is
 doing their effort a real disservice I think.
 My $400 HD cam was the best money I ever spent.

 Dave.

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Non-XLR hand held Microphone

2010-02-09 Thread Rupert Howe

Awesome!

On 9 Feb 2010, at 14:22, Cris Thomas wrote:


 Just to follow up on my original microphone questions...

 I ended up going with two Mics. A Rode Video Mic that attaches to  
 the cold shoe and inputs dual channel audio (I don't know if it is  
 really stereo or not, probably not). All of the reviews I read on  
 this Mic said it was awesome so I expected about half of that, but I  
 was wrong. It is awesome, especially at the price.  I did one  
 interview with the camera and mic on a tripod about three feet away  
 while I and the interviewee sat on a couch in a noisy hotel lobby,  
 The mic got minimal background noise and both of our voices are very  
 clear. I am very impressed.

 As a bonus for me anyway, since it is larger than my camera, it  
 makes the camera look a little more professional and people don't  
 look at me like I am just some dweeb with a camera.

 As for the original question about hand held Mics I was in a hurry  
 and didn't have much budget so I opted for the Radio Shack $25 Mic  
 with the build in 1/4 cable. I added an 1/8 adapter and plugged it  
 into the camera. I covered the mic with a $5 pop filter and did my  
 interviews that way. All of them came out great, even when I didn't  
 have the mic very close to the interviewees mouth the sound was  
 still more than acceptable.  It only records in mono but I was able  
 to copy the left channel to the right side without to much trouble  
 in FCE. I'm sure you audiophiles are aghast that I used a RatShack  
 microphone instead of some $200 thing but it works for me with what  
 I'm doing. I'm happy with it.

 I made a home made Mic flag for it that came out pretty well. So  
 between the MIc flag, the Rode Mic and the tripod I think I made  
 quite the impression. I had a few people ask me what TV station I  
 was recording for!

 I did discover that I need a lighting solution, but I'll make new  
 post for that question.  Thanks everyone for your input!  This is a  
 great list!

 - C. Thomas

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Remember when it was all 320x240?

2010-02-09 Thread Rupert Howe

No - you're right - Blip have earned loyalty with great features   
service.  Despite earlier praise for YT, I can see myself continuing  
to use Blip for personal videoblogging.

But according to their ToS, they prohibit pretty much any commercial  
use that's not creation of a Show:

Content that has as its sole or primary purpose to advertise a  
particular product or service that, in the sole judgment of Blip.tv,  
does not otherwise have redeeming value to the community. Blip.tv may  
allow the uploading of some such content for a fee, at its sole  
discretion. Such advertising content may be treated differently than  
other content (i.e. through indications that it is an advertisement,  
or exclusion from some indices or searches).

There's no way any commercial entity can let themselves use Blip to  
embed videos, for fear of having their account deleted.  Sad, really -  
but I see why: it limits their content  bandwidth  storage costs to  
those producers who are more likely to add Blip's adverts to their  
videos.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

.
On 8 Feb 2010, at 17:38, Heath wrote:

 Oh, I just had to comment on this, for me I will always use Blip as  
 long as they are around and as long as they contiue to provide the  
 excellent customer service they have been known for. A few different  
 reasons why, one - when all the other video sites, including YT had  
 crappy TOS's, crappy customer service (not really sure that has  
 gotten better for the other services), poor quality, etc...Blip was  
 leading the way by offering Creative Commens, excellent customer  
 service (remember the blizzard that hit NY a few years ago and Mike  
 plowed his way to the office to get the service back up and running)  
 and they cared about the creatorsto me that should mean  
 something...

 Now it doesn't mean blind loyality on my part or anyone's part as I  
 think you have to keep inovating and moving the ball forward.

 By no means do I mean that YT is not good, I mean there are a few  
 billion reasons why they areI just happen to like Blip better  
 for the reasons above...that and to be a bit honest, Goggle already  
 has enough of my personal information

 Heath
 http://heathparks.com

 --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe rup...@... wrote:
 
  I am finding fewer and fewer reasons to avoid YouTube. YouTube's
  quality now is as good as Blip - better than their flvs, in fact -  
 the
  new layout on their pages is good, and so are their sharing options.
 
  Get round the bad bits by turning off comments and ratings, and add
  showinfo=0 to your embed code to remove the ugly text title  star
  rating from the embedded player.
 
  I just made a 1 minute profile video for my wife's business, and
  embedded it on her home page as a YouTube player. It looks good. You
  can see it at:
  http://londonalexandertechnique.co.uk/
 
  Previously I would have used Blip for this, but they and Vimeo now
  prohibit you from publishing any videos which promote businesses. I
  think I'm going to be using YouTube a lot more from now on, for
  everything.
 
  Rupert
  http://twittervlog.tv
 
  On 6 Feb 2010, at 00:08, Jay dedman wrote:
 
They don't make you an HD flash version but blip has always
   supported
any size file you want to put up there. You can just add a 1080p
   file
(along with lots of other formats) when you upload.
  
   Thats why blip is good. They are almost completely format  
 agnostic.
   For instance, I use always blip when I need to post an mp3.
  
   Jay
  
   --
   http://ryanishungry.com
   http://momentshowing.net
   http://twitter.com/jaydedman
   917 371 6790
  
  
 
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Remember when it was all 320x240?

2010-02-06 Thread Rupert Howe

Thanks :)

You add showinfo=0 at the end of the video URL in the embed code,  
before the  quote.  You need to add it twice - the URL is repeated in  
the Object and the Embed section of the code.  Thus:

object width=560 height=340param name=movie 
value=http://www.youtube.com/v/3-QYMb6l0FEhl=en_USfs=1showinfo=0 
/paramparam name=allowFullScreen value=true/paramparam  
name=allowscriptaccess value=always/paramembed 
src=http://www.youtube.com/v/3-QYMb6l0FEhl=en_USfs=1showinfo=0 
 type=application/x-shockwave-flash allowscriptaccess=always  
allowfullscreen=true width=560 height=340/embed/object

YouTube into iTunes podcasting is still a problem, weirdly - but  
there's a service called http://ytpodcaster.com/ which gives you an  
iTunes feed address for your MP4 files - which allows you to subscribe  
in iTunes, Zune, etc.  You can add this address to the Podcast store.   
The only problem is that ytpodcaster might disappear or be taken down  
by Google - for some reason they like to kill user-generated hacks -   
so it's not as secure as if it were a service offered by YouTube  
itself.  Hopefully it will be eventually, though.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 6 Feb 2010, at 03:18, Tom Dolan wrote:

 Hi Rupert,

 Good perspective. Thank you. My blog is almost ready for prime time
 and to test the workings of videos I downloaded 2 videos that I had
 parked on YouTube. I'm pretty impressed with the simplicity of the
 embed and the quite nice functioning of the videos. I've been
 preparing to use blip and one of the reasons was because they seem to
 be an entryway to iTunes. What about that?

 Also, I'm not really into coding although I've been directed to make
 some changes with wordPress and I've been fine with it. Where exactly
 would I post showinfo=0 in the embed code to clean-up the player?
 Thanx, and btw, the video of the Alexander Tech. is nice: calm,
 honest, conversational.

 Tom Dolan

 On Feb 5, 2010, at 5:05 PM, Rupert Howe wrote:

  I am finding fewer and fewer reasons to avoid YouTube. YouTube's
  quality now is as good as Blip - better than their flvs, in fact -  
 the
  new layout on their pages is good, and so are their sharing options.
 
  Get round the bad bits by turning off comments and ratings, and add
  showinfo=0 to your embed code to remove the ugly text title  star
  rating from the embedded player.
 
  I just made a 1 minute profile video for my wife's business, and
  embedded it on her home page as a YouTube player. It looks good. You
  can see it at:
  http://londonalexandertechnique.co.uk/
 
  Previously I would have used Blip for this, but they and Vimeo now
  prohibit you from publishing any videos which promote businesses. I
  think I'm going to be using YouTube a lot more from now on, for
  everything.
 
  Rupert
  http://twittervlog.tv
 
  On 6 Feb 2010, at 00:08, Jay dedman wrote:
 
  They don't make you an HD flash version but blip has always
  supported
  any size file you want to put up there. You can just add a 1080p
  file
  (along with lots of other formats) when you upload.
 
  Thats why blip is good. They are almost completely format agnostic.
  For instance, I use always blip when I need to post an mp3.
 
  Jay
 
  --
  http://ryanishungry.com
  http://momentshowing.net
  http://twitter.com/jaydedman
  917 371 6790
 
 
 
 
 
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 
 
 
  
 
  Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 

 Tom Dolan
 tomjdo...@gmail.com


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Remember when it was all 320x240?

2010-02-05 Thread Rupert Howe

I am finding fewer and fewer reasons to avoid YouTube.   YouTube's  
quality now is as good as Blip - better than their flvs, in fact - the  
new layout on their pages is good, and so are their sharing options.

Get round the bad bits by turning off comments and ratings, and add  
showinfo=0 to your embed code to remove the ugly text title  star  
rating from the embedded player.

I just made a 1 minute profile video for my wife's business, and  
embedded it on her home page as a YouTube player.  It looks good. You  
can see it at:
http://londonalexandertechnique.co.uk/

Previously I would have used Blip for this, but they and Vimeo now  
prohibit you from publishing any videos which promote businesses.   I  
think I'm going to be using YouTube a lot more from now on, for  
everything.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 6 Feb 2010, at 00:08, Jay dedman wrote:

  They don't make you an HD flash version but blip has always  
 supported
  any size file you want to put up there. You can just add a 1080p  
 file
  (along with lots of other formats) when you upload.

 Thats why blip is good. They are almost completely format agnostic.
 For instance, I use always blip when I need to post an mp3.

 Jay

 --
 http://ryanishungry.com
 http://momentshowing.net
 http://twitter.com/jaydedman
 917 371 6790

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] looking for examples of good direct to camera video diary type vlogs

2010-02-02 Thread Rupert Howe

I would recommend some of my own stuff:
http://twittervlog.tv/popular-videos/
but i fear the language may be a little rich for 13 year olds.

Ze Frank's The Show is a good place to start.  Very creative to-camera  
videoblogging - it ran from 2006-7.

He defined the style that you can see a lot of on YouTube now - with  
fake video diaries like Fred
http://www.youtube.com/user/Fred

and videobloggers you see popping up in the Most Viewed section on  
YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/videos

 From this list, Mike Moon does a great regular video diary at the  
moment:
http://vlog.mikemoon.net

People like Ryanne Hodson and Michael Verdi did awesome video diary  
work from 2004-6.
http://ryanedit.blogspot.com
http://michaelverdi.com

I'll let others jump in with specific examples of videos because I  
suddenly have to run to take my daughter to school!

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



On 2 Feb 2010, at 01:54, Christopher wrote:

 Hi all,
 I got question. Just started a new WGBH Lab open call inspired by  
 The Diary of Anne Frank. For this call for entries, we are asking  
 for video diary entries, hence the connection to Anne Fank

 It's targeted to youth media makers 13 and up so I started a section  
 called video to inspire...basically it's section for me share  
 example videos of what we might be looking for but also so show  
 methods that kids might be able to express themselves via video.

 can you all suggest some good examples out the video blogging  
 community that I could link to or embed?

 Let me know.

 Chris
 The WGBH Lab
 e-mail: chris_hasti...@wgbh.org


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] looking for examples of good direct to camera video diary type vlogs

2010-02-02 Thread Rupert Howe

Now I'm back, I'll briefly add... most video diaries are not the  
classic to-camera video diaries that you see characters on TV shows   
films doing - those that are to-camera tend to be somewhere between  
being editorial opinions and stand up comedy.  Personal video diaries  
online have tended to be more like classic home movies - people  
pointing the camera away from them, videoing the people and things  
around them, and then cutting them into simple sequences.  Like Jay's  
video of his mother's last days, posted in November:
http://momentshowing.net/2009/11/video-sure/

One of my favourite types of video diary has been the videoblog  
travelogue as mastered by Ryanne  Jay - just filming moments without  
commentary or music and stitching them together - the natural sounds  
forming a rhythm:
http://tinyurl.com/ryanne

I have taught videoblogging to teenagers, and most of them were quite  
bored by videoblogs and video diaries - even those that I thought were  
amazing or funny.  I figured that this was because most video diaries  
and blogs are by adults, about adult lives.  This is one of the  
reasons Anne Frank is so accessible to young people - she's young.   
And one of the reasons why the nightmarish fake video diary of Fred,  
which I linked to before, has been so phenomenally popular - he's a  
kid.  Ditto the other fictional phenomenon, LonelyGirl15...

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv




On 2 Feb 2010, at 08:48, Rupert Howe wrote:

 I would recommend some of my own stuff:
 http://twittervlog.tv/popular-videos/
 but i fear the language may be a little rich for 13 year olds.

 Ze Frank's The Show is a good place to start.  Very creative to-camera
 videoblogging - it ran from 2006-7.

 He defined the style that you can see a lot of on YouTube now - with
 fake video diaries like Fred
 http://www.youtube.com/user/Fred

 and videobloggers you see popping up in the Most Viewed section on
 YouTube:
 http://www.youtube.com/videos

 From this list, Mike Moon does a great regular video diary at the
 moment:
 http://vlog.mikemoon.net

 People like Ryanne Hodson and Michael Verdi did awesome video diary
 work from 2004-6.
 http://ryanedit.blogspot.com
 http://michaelverdi.com

 I'll let others jump in with specific examples of videos because I
 suddenly have to run to take my daughter to school!

 Rupert
 http://twittervlog.tv



 On 2 Feb 2010, at 01:54, Christopher wrote:

 Hi all,
 I got question. Just started a new WGBH Lab open call inspired by
 The Diary of Anne Frank. For this call for entries, we are asking
 for video diary entries, hence the connection to Anne Fank

 It's targeted to youth media makers 13 and up so I started a section
 called video to inspire...basically it's section for me share
 example videos of what we might be looking for but also so show
 methods that kids might be able to express themselves via video.

 can you all suggest some good examples out the video blogging
 community that I could link to or embed?

 Let me know.

 Chris
 The WGBH Lab
 e-mail: chris_hasti...@wgbh.org






 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [videoblogging] Re: youtube sound

2010-02-01 Thread Rupert Howe

Give it a few hours - try again.   Chances are it'll pass.  In the  
meantime, try exporting and uploading a different version - use an  
Apple iPod setting as an easy option.  And also export a 10 second  
clip from your video and upload to see if the same thing's happening.
Rupert

On 1 Feb 2010, at 23:29, loretabirkus wrote:

 I use H264, picture 1280x720, audio AAC (44.1 samplerate, 96  
 bitrate). I cleaned the sound with Audacity and then added some  
 bass, just to diminish the background noise.

 I can't upload the video since it's for my client and I would hate  
 for it to go public before he sees it. But I've used same settings  
 on all my video uploads for Youtube and never experienced any  
 problems. And the video and sound quality were very good when  
 uploaded. This is the first one I have this type of issue with. I  
 found in one forum a discussion about voice delay, but no solution  
 was suggested.

 Thanks.

 Loreta

 --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman jay.ded...@...  
 wrote:
 
   So..now that I edited the video and uploaded to the Youtube I'm  
 experiencing some sort of video behind the sound issue. The raw  
 compressed file is looking good, but when I upload it to Youtube,  
 the visual goes faster than the sound. Is it just me or Youtube  
 doing smth wrong today? Have you had any issues like that? I did fix  
 the raw sound to reduce the hum. Could that be doing something to  
 the video on Youtube?
 
  It'd be helpful if you send a link to the Youtube video so we can  
 see
  it. Also be good to know how you compressed the video and fixed the
  sound.
 
  Jay
 
 
  --
  http://ryanishungry.com
  http://momentshowing.net
  http://twitter.com/jaydedman
  917 371 6790
 


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Zoom H4N Audio Recorder

2010-01-30 Thread Rupert Howe

Thanks, Brook - I haven't seen the noise mentioned by anybody else.
What mics do you use with its mini-jack inputs? I'm presuming from  
what you say that you don't use your XLR mics via a beachbox?
R

On 29 Jan 2010, at 21:42, Brook Hinton wrote:

 The H4n has XLR inputs but unfortunately the mic preamps are really  
 noisy. I
 almost got one, since I have AT4073's which are really fantastic  
 shotgun
 mics, but the noise was a deal killer.

 The Olympus LS10 can be found pretty cheap these days and while it  
 doesn't
 have XLR inputs it beats out the H4N in terms of specs and has VERY  
 quiet
 preamps (though it works better with externals as the built-ins have a
 non-defeatable low-cut filter, which I would always engage in the  
 field
 anyway so its not a big deal, esp. if you EQ).

 The new Sony PCM-M10 is supposed to be fantastic and in field tests  
 beats
 out much higher end units. Its built-in mics have been described as  
 among
 the best available for recorders of this type.

 I'd go for either of those over the Zoom unless XLR was absolutely
 essential. I ended up with an LS10 over the Sony but only because a  
 good
 used unit saved me $100 over the new price.

 Brook


 On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Roger Conant deade...@hotmail.com  
 wrote:




 Hi: The Zoom H4N is a great tool. it records good sound with an  
 nice on
 board adjustable mic. But, as you mentioned, it also takes XLR  
 inputs at mic
 or line level. It also does lots of other cool things --making it a  
 kind of
 audio Swiss army knife. For instance, it acts as a USB interface  
 between
 your computer and any audio equipment you plug into it-- making it  
 really
 handy. It can also serve as an SD card reader if you need it. The  
 menu
 features are a little slow to fire up, but other than that , its a  
 cool
 tool. Roger.

 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com
 From: rup...@twittervlog.tv rupert%40twittervlog.tv
 Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:55:24 +
 Subject: [videoblogging] Zoom H4N Audio Recorder


 Further to our discussions about sound, I saw a Zoom H4N audio

 recorder in action on a Canon 5D Mk2 shoot a couple of weeks ago, and

 I'm going to get one for myself.

 It's a portable audio recorder with XLR inputs and on board mics.

 There's a video about using it with DSLRs here (including mounting it

 on your camera), which is part infomercial for Zoom, part infomercial

 for Zacuto, but still has a lot of interesting stuff in it.

 http://vimeo.com/4782593

 Rupert

 http://twittervlog.tv


 __
 Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
 http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390707/direct/01/


 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






 -- 
 ___
 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]



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [videoblogging] camera features

2010-01-28 Thread Rupert Howe

A good quality camera shouldn't have too much problem with tape  
noise.   An in-store test isn't going to help you because of the  
background noise.Better to google.   But even if there's no real  
hum from the tape mechanism, the on-board mic is going to be pretty  
poor quality anyway compared to an external.

I would spend more time worrying about the quality of the image,  
colours and low light performance.  Then lens is probably more  
important than anything.

AVCHD should be fine with iMovie 09.

HD still isn't necessary for web viewing - particularly 1080.  Most  
web video is seen at somewhere between 320x240 and 640x480.  Most HD  
is 720.  But things are changing and HD futureproofs you for a while.   
And a good quality HD camera with a good lens should give you nice  
images even if you export at much lower resolution.

Play with the Sanyo.  I have found the pistol grip to be the best way  
to hold a camera, especially for videoblogging.  I wish every small  
camera was built like that.  And when you're not hand-holding it, you  
can put it on a little tripod, so it doesn't matter.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 28 Jan 2010, at 21:05, Tom Dolan wrote:

 Hey Group-folk,

 In preparation for a visit to the photo shop next week, I'd like to
 run some features by you and pleze comment if you can. I'll be
 shooting for the web, to put in web sites, mine and maybe others. I'll
 edit in iMovie'09 on an intel iMac.

 I've been thinking future=Flash memory, but many Tape cameras are
 still made like the VIXIA HV40. Is Tape worth considering??

 People complain about motor noise in the audio. How will I know if the
 motor noise is being captured or not? Will an in store test tell me?

 Is AVCHD difficult to work with/download.and finally is HD
 necessary or preferable for web viewing?

 BTW, the Sanyo specs look good but the form factor discourages me.

 Gotta move forward with my project so thanx for the input/feedback.

 Tom Dolan
 tomjdo...@gmail.com

 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] Zoom H4N Audio Recorder

2010-01-28 Thread Rupert Howe

Further to our discussions about sound, I saw a Zoom H4N audio  
recorder in action on a Canon 5D Mk2 shoot a couple of weeks ago, and  
I'm going to get one for myself.

It's a portable audio recorder with XLR inputs and on board mics.

There's a video about using it with DSLRs here (including mounting it  
on your camera), which is part infomercial for Zoom, part infomercial  
for Zacuto, but still has a lot of interesting stuff in it.
http://vimeo.com/4782593

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of internet TV videoblogging

lol!

On 26 Jan 2010, at 10:26, Adrian Miles wrote:

 sort of like a Steenbeck? :-)

 On 19/01/2010, at 10:16 AM, Richard Amirault wrote:

  I would LOVE to edit with a touch screen. just seems like it'd be
  more fun
  and direct.

 cheers
 Adrian Miles
 adrian.mi...@rmit.edu.au
 Program Director, Bachelor of Communication Honours
 vogmae.net.au


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] avoiding/cleaning hum noise

Do you get a hum wherever you film inside, or particularly in one  
location?  Lots of household/office appliances that we can't hear or  
filter out make a big hum when recorded - air con, computers, fridges,  
etc.  Try being ruthless about shutting everything off when filming.   
Keep different types of cables away from each other, and if you need  
to cross them, do so at right angles.
Test whether it's the tape mechanism that's making a lot of noise by  
monitoring the audio with a good pair of headphones at a distance from  
the camera, both with and without the tape running.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 26 Jan 2010, at 08:38, loretabirkus wrote:

 Hello again,

 I would like to know how you manage to record a sound with minimum  
 hum in a room environment. I have a good microphone that I use for  
 my filming, but I always get a huge hum sound if I film inside.

 I used Audacity to eliminate the background noise, but sometimes it  
 doesn't work and it makes the voice sound weirdly alien :)

 I even purchased a new Rode Videomic to see if there's any  
 difference in the hum sound volume and I still get it with this mic  
 as well.

 Any tips how to eliminate as much as possible the hum noise during  
 filming so that there's less work during editing? And how to  
 eliminate the hum noise and keep a descent quality during the  
 editing process?

 I'm stuck on this now as I'm trying all ways (Audacity, Adobe  
 Audition, Magic Audio cleaning softwares) to remove the noise and I  
 don't get the results that I want.

 Thanks much!

 Loreta


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] camera

I still love the Canon HV20.  It's been superseded a couple of times,  
and I've heard much less about the HV30 and HV40 than I did about the  
HV20.  Everybody wanted one when they came out 2-3 years ago. I used  
to borrow a friend's for work, and never got round to getting my own.   
I've yet to see another camera in the same range with the same quality.

  I loved Quirk's video for the Navlopomo game, shot on an HV20,  
albeit with a 35mm Nikon lens adapter, which is probably more  
expensive than the camera (?).  http://www.vimeo.com/7730272
Or Valdez's videoblogging with HV30: http://www.vimeo.com/6143526

So if I had $600/800, I'd probably get one of those.

But I don't know what 2009's hottest mid-range HD camcorder was.

If I won a few grand on the lottery, I'd get myself an EOS 5D Mk2 with  
a nice lens, like a shot.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 26 Jan 2010, at 04:43, Tom Dolan wrote:

 Hey Vid-folk,

 I had an interesting idea and I want to run it by you. A local but
 large pro camera shop might take in trade, a complete Pentax 35mm
 outfit. Xcellent condition, lenses, motor, etc... towards something
 else. I won't get what I think it's worth but I might be offered enuf
 to let it go. Now,

 Here's the conundrum: at different price levels starting lo and ending
 at about $6/800..(OK so I'm optimistic), what would you suggest I
 consider? It's got to work with iMac-iMovie'09, have an external mic,
 and I prefer flash memory over tape/hard-drive. BTW, I was surprised
 to see a Sanyo model mentioned here several times. I don't see them
 featured on the review sites, usually the same canon/sony/pana/etc
 stuff. My 1st 16mm camera was a Sanyo and it was pretty good.

 So what video cameras would YOU trade the 35mm system for? and I'm not
 into the Flip style camera for now.

 Go for it...and Thanx.

 Tom Dolan
 tomjdo...@gmail.com


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] avoiding/cleaning hum noise

and set to stun!

On 27 Jan 2010, at 06:59, Joly MacFie wrote:

  Record the room silent and then lay that beneath everything else.  
 (No
  room is actually silent and this is standard practice.)
 

 and invert the phase!

 -- 
 --
 Joly MacFie 917 442 8665 Skype:punkcast
 WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 --

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Winkball.com - new British vlogging service

2010-01-24 Thread Rupert Howe

The iSight is about as good as it gets.
You'll have trouble importing hi-8 into your Mac, unless you want to  
fork out for final cut pro and an analogue/digital converter box.   
Would be cheaper and much better just to buy a Kodak Zi8 or a Flip  
Mino HD for $100-200.  Or even the previous version of either: the Zi6  
or the Flip SD, for slightly less.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 24 Jan 2010, at 21:56, Tom Dolan wrote:

 Hey Jay,

 I'm sittin here reading Steve's book when a thought occurs. My father-
 in-law gave me a Sharp video camera when we left Japan to return to
 the US. It's a Hi8 camera with all the menus in Japanese, but Masako
 translated them for me so I could use the camera. The output is Hi8
 tape of course with RCA cables too. I stopped using it because I
 figured the world is digital and time has passed it by. But maybe I
 could still use it...thinkin budget.

 Of course if it required an expensive converter of some sort I'd
 rather put the money into a new camera...any thoughts.

 Also, I am making the vid-pod in my studio using the iSight on the
 iMac. Looks ok so far. Would I get any noticeable increase in
 production values if I got the Logitech webcam for Mac?

 Thanx,
 Tom

 On Jan 23, 2010, at 7:38 PM, Jay dedman wrote:

 On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Tom Dolan tomjdo...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 Thanx for the response Jay. I've been monitoring this group for
 awhile
 and I'm impressed with the (mostly) positive energy here.  I
 appreciate your input.

 We used to have big flame wars and dramafests every six months or so.
 Pretty tame these days. Think people are all just busy creating and
 living their life.

 I do have a channel up on blip.tv and have only
 uploaded a test file to see if I could get it to work.  It's been
 there for 2 + months while I've been getting ready to get real. I'll
 inform the group about the blog-n-channel when I get further along.
 Any opinions on tube mogul?

 Seems like a great option if you want to spam multiple video sites at
 once. http://heyspread.com/ is another one. It all depends on what
 your goal is. I'd focus on making the best videos you canthen
 worry about all the promotion etc.

 Steve Garfield just published a book called Get Seen:
 http://www.amazon.com/Get-Seen-Secrets-Building-Business/dp/ 
 0470525460
 He probably answers a lot of questions for the beginner on, well,
 getting seen.

 Jay

 -- 
 http://ryanishungry.com
 http://momentshowing.net
 http://twitter.com/jaydedman
 917 371 6790



 Tom Dolan
 tomjdo...@gmail.com





 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



 

 Yahoo! Groups Links

Re: [videoblogging] Winkball.com - new British vlogging service

2010-01-24 Thread Rupert Howe

Seems it was bum advice that converter  software would be v expensive  
for Mac - mainly because I have bought very expensive kit for this in  
the past.

But yeah, the biggest pain in the ass in the whole process is time  
wasted on things like importing your clips onto your computer.  It  
makes so much difference to your flow when you can just zap in the  
clips from a USB cable or a memory card, and get cutting.  Even  
capturing from digital tape seems like a ridiculous activity, now,  
whenever I have to do it.  I have a bunch of stuff that I'm not  
getting around to doing anything with because it's sitting on tape.

And to do it for a relatively low quality analogue image - when great  
quality  portability  importability is available so cheaply - is  
something that I'd recommend only if you really can't afford the  
cheapest good new camcorders like the Zi8 and the Flip.

Rupert

On 24 Jan 2010, at 23:54, Jay dedman wrote:

  The iSight is about as good as it gets.
  You'll have trouble importing hi-8 into your Mac, unless you want to
  fork out for final cut pro and an analogue/digital converter box.
  Would be cheaper and much better just to buy a Kodak Zi8 or a Flip
  Mino HD for $100-200. Or even the previous version of either: the  
 Zi6
  or the Flip SD, for slightly less.

 I agree with Rupert that you can certainly capture a hi8 video onto
 your computer with converters...but you'll cause yourself a lot of
 headache. Be easier to just invest in an inexpensive, high quality DV
 camera.

 Jay

 --
 http://ryanishungry.com
 http://momentshowing.net
 http://twitter.com/jaydedman
 917 371 6790

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[videoblogging] Winkball.com - new British vlogging service

2010-01-23 Thread Rupert Howe

I just found
http://www.winkball.com

They're sending reporters to events to get talking heads reactions to  
things like current affairs issues.  Users are also recording their  
own To Camera vlog pieces.

They say they have 829 video blogs on their site.  Brits are less  
outgoing than Americans, and so have been reticent about vlogging -  
and only tend to do it through corporate channels, not independently.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

[videoblogging] Mefeedia's State of the Vlogosphere 2010

2010-01-22 Thread Rupert Howe

I meant to post about this 10 days ago, but then got frantic and ill  
and it got lost in the mix.

Mefeedia's State of the Vlogosphere 2010 makes for a very interesting  
read:

http://blog.mefeedia.com/vlog-2010

While the level of activity on this list has slowly dropped over the  
last 3 years, the number of vlogs that Mefeedia tracks has risen from  
20,000 to 110,000 since 2007.

As I said here before, I think this is going to be a big year for  
vlogging, despite the breakdown in the vibrancy  output of our  
community.

Vloggers are the only producers of original content on YouTube who  
regularly attract millions of views, apart from animators.  All the  
other most popular videos are clips of MSM.

Check out the Mefeedia report via the link above (some highlights  
listed below):

With 36%, YouTube is the strongest single source of video
(14% Blip, 31% independent  other)

International vlog numbers are growing faster than the U.S.
After English, Spanish-speaking vlog are growing the fastest.

The average pro-vlogger syndicates their video to 3.6 sites.

Feedburner is no longer the “default” syndication mechanism

MRSS tools have become much more sophisticated

IPhone was the fastest growing mobile device for watching video and  
highest video consumption in 2009 (by 6x)

1024×768 is most popular screen resolution (40%), followed by 1280×800  
(20%), 1280×1024 (10%)

Playstation 3 is most popular for TV viewing, followed by the Nintendo  
Wii.

The average watch time for short-form is 1:15 min and the average for  
long-form is 8:50 min.

People are watching more short-form than long-form video.

--

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Turnhere free videos

2010-01-21 Thread Rupert Howe

I agree with all of you.  $25-100 for 1-2 days work is not acceptable,  
and debases the market.  There are a lot of filler video content work  
for QA sites being parcelled out that pays appallingly, as I think we  
discussed before.

On the other hand, the proposition that was offered by Turnhere was  
that you shouldn't spend more than 3-4 hours in total (pre-production  
to delivery) making each 1 minute video, for businesses in walking  
distance from your house.  They have a checklist, provide all the  
documents, etc.  They don't want anything fancy - just a basic to- 
camera interview with some cutaways and a clip of the company's  
signage. So it should work out as $50-70 per hour.  They also won't  
take on newbies or students - they require professional commercial  
experience.  And have QA standards for everything submitted.

I'm not sure about the WMV thing.  They specify that you upload H264  
3000kpbs 864x486, and talk about how they provide iPod/iPhone  
compatible files to show businesses.  Odd that they have a WMV  
download for their intro webinar.

I'm not pimping them - I haven't even signed up with them.  The  
commoditization of video production concerns me because it affects the  
price and value of genuine creative filmmaking in this arena.  But I  
just wanted to put it out there for discussion and get some of the  
facts clear.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 21 Jan 2010, at 04:12, Bohuš wrote:


 Hiya,

 Just a word of background, I do TV production for a living.  Mostly
 independent stuff, but some broadcast stuff...

 I've been approached a lot by companies like this, especially start- 
 ups.
 They want me to find ways to reduce costs, and still deliver a large
 percentage of what I do to clients. The problem is that I do actually
 have to make a living off of making video, and that's not going to
 happen if each one takes a day or two to make and the most I can  
 hope to
 get is $25-100.

 It's great if you're on vacation, take a few fun videos, and then  
 get a
 check for $25... that's great.  The problem is when I'm asked to  
 create
 videos with the same level of production that I usually charge many  
 time
 more for. You're right... there are a lot of start-ups out there who
 think that the best business model is to create a venue for other  
 people
 to do all the work, and then they make their cash off the backs of  
 others.

 Ebay is a great example of that. They've created this quasi-community
 (less and less these days) and behave as if they were a store like
 Amazon (with special quasi-promotions, advertising, etc.), but they
 don't actually stock anything or even lick a postage stamp.  They've
 made their fortune by creating this virtual market. That's fair since
 everyone is making a little something, but what do I get out of  
 making a
 video review for $25-50?  It's fine if you're having fun, but how to
 move to the next level?

 What affects me now is that many clients who approach me now think  
 that
 this is the status quo for video production. I love the FLIP camera (I
 have several of them, after all...), but its ease has made my clients
 think that all video is just that easy. it's funny how shocked people
 are when they call me for a gig, and I don't jump at the chance to  
 bring
 thousands of dollars worth of gear to their $200 shoot.

 Oh well, these topics have been covered before here so I'll quiet  
 down.
 I love the video revolution, and I love that more people are using  
 video
 to communicate than ever, but I don't love opportunistic companies who
 devalue the industries that they try to exploit.


 TurnHere.com, who are an agency who match up filmmakers with small
 businesses, have a new promo going for US  Canadian filmmakers.
 You can offer free 1 minute videos to small businesses, and Turnhere
 will pay you $200 to make them.
 It's a very small amount of money, and is undercutting other people
 who are trying to do the same thing on an individual basis.
 But the requirements are much lower than your average bespoke video
 job. It's pretty much video by numbers. Turn up for an hour, shoot
 an interview with the proprietor, shoot some B roll, cut a 1 minute
 film, get paid $200.


 I looked into their business model. I'd want to here from video
 producers who did a lot of work for them. Seems more like
 http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/ff_demandmedia.

 Ironically, Turnhere's orientation video is a downloading WMV:
 http://producers.turnhere.com/orientation-webinar-video.html
 Guess some there doesn't know how to do simple transcoding?

 Sorry to be a scrooge, but I hate companies that just want to profit
 from other people's work. Like an Amway scheme.

 Jay

 --
 http://ryanishungry.com
 http://momentshowing.net
 http://twitter.com/jaydedman
 917 371 6790


 

 Yahoo! Groups Links







 -- 
 --
  Bohus Blahut
  (BOH-hoosh BLAH-hoot)

modern filmmaker

[videoblogging] YouTube Gets A Makeover

2010-01-21 Thread Rupert Howe

Google have stripped down and improved the YouTube video page design.

More about it at this ReadWriteWeb article:
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/youtube_gets_a_makeover_launches_new_video_player_watch_pages.php

I like it - it's much cleaner. The right hand side is all related
videos and a 'featured video'.

There's a pull-down menu for choosing what resolution you want to see
it in - up to 1080p.

There are two separate buttons to let you see it in it's intended
resolution and in fullscreen.

The Share options have changed - much simpler and clearer.

Bad points:
The 'More Videos by this User' panel is now even more hidden away -
it's now accessed via a link at the top of the page, next to the
channel name, saying 34 videos

There's no more 1-5 ratings, which is probably a good thing - but
they've replaced it with badly weighted Thumbs Down and Like (Add
To Favourites) buttons, which I think raises the bar for saying you
like something rather to high. Maybe I like something, but don't want
to add it to my favourites? But I can imagine a lot of YT morons just
clicking Thumbs Down on a video five seconds in and then clicking away.

The biggest problem with their pages, of course, is that they still
haven't done anything about the comments. They should filter for
obscenities better, and not just allow flagging for spam. Kids love
watching youtube videos of cartoons and cute animals - but even
cartoons have just unbelievable angry hateful comments beneath them.
I don't really want to have to stop my daughter watching funny things
on YouTube when she learns to read. I don't want her exposed to that
level of hate. I don't want MYSELF exposed to it, for god's sake.
Google need to sort this out NOW, since Chad Hurley and Steve Chen
clearly never gave a shit.

You can join the experiment by clicking on this link:
http://youtube.com/watch5?enable=1next_url=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DjqxENMKaeCU

and you can opt out again by clicking here:
http://youtube.com/watch5?enable=0next_url=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DjqxENMKaeCU

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[videoblogging] Turnhere free videos

2010-01-20 Thread Rupert Howe

So much to catch up on here.  Before I do, I thought I'd let you know  
about this:

TurnHere.com, who are an agency who match up filmmakers with small  
businesses, have a new promo going for US  Canadian filmmakers.

You can offer free 1 minute videos to small businesses, and Turnhere  
will pay you $200 to make them.

It's a very small amount of money, and is undercutting other people  
who are trying to do the same thing on an individual basis.

But the requirements are much lower than your average bespoke video  
job.  It's pretty much video by numbers.  Turn up for an hour, shoot  
an interview with the proprietor, shoot some B roll, cut a 1 minute  
film, get paid $200.

I also know a local business who is selling 3 minute films to local  
businesses for £1000-£1500 ($1700-2300)

Anyway, there it is

Rupert

Re: [videoblogging] Best Video Sitemap Tool

2010-01-16 Thread Rupert Howe

If you have Dreamweaver, there's an HTML sitemap generator, which can
make a sitemap for both pages and files at:
http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/exchange/index.cfm?event=extensionDetailloc=en_usextid=1289018PID=2874929

There's also a good Google-spec XML sitemap generator for Dreamweaver.

And there's a Google XML sitemap generator plugin for Wordpress. I
bet there's an HTML sitemap generator plugin too.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 16 Jan 2010, at 14:25, Julian Seery Gude wrote:

Hi Gang,

I need to start producing larger quantities of video sitemaps for
clients and want a tool or process that will make the process quick
and easy. Do you have any recommendations?

Thanks so much!

p.s. Anyone drooling over the new full HD 60fps Sanyo Xacti VPS-CS1
for $299? I am. I'm thinking it is my next camera but I'm terribly
sad they didn't put an external mic on it. Instead we have Sound
zoom. Bollocks.

http://sanyo.com/xacti/english/products/vpc_cs1/index.html

/julian

---
Julian Seery Gude
jul...@exceler8.com
{561} 584-9088 or {skype} exceler8
LOCALNa8ion.com and exceler8.com
On the web: http://www.google.com/profiles/JulianSeeryGude

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] new to the group - question about filming

2010-01-15 Thread Rupert Howe

I wouldn't try to avoid using the location if it's dark and ugly.  The  
combo of fluorescent ceiling lights and your studio lights may not be  
very useful for a dark room full of people trying to do a workshop  
(where your lighting needs are secondary).  Sounds quite stressful and  
ultimately probably quite unattractive and unusable.  If it's a 1-2  
minute film, you're probably not going to get a lot of meaningful  
content from the workshop anyway, and these kind of things always look  
a bit odd.

So think around it: how can you explain the workshops without showing  
them?  Can you get the guy to talk about what he does in little  
snippets, and ask him to get former participants to give testimonials  
to camera which you can intercut.  If you really need to shoot him  
doing his thing, cheat and film just him speaking in a nicer brighter  
location.  Get them outside where possible.  Think about rigging up a  
white background (sheet or paper) to do his presentation against.

As far as what to film, personally I would get fairly close up to  
faces - shooting zoomed in (on a long lens) can give a nice effect,  
but don't include the actual zooming process in your edit, as zooms  
make cheap videos look cheaper.

Other details might be good for cutaways if you really need to show a  
long piece from start to finish - but you're probably much better just  
sticking to quick cuts.  To many cutaways, filler shots and random  
details can be distracting and unhelpful.  Simplicity is powerful!

There are a lot of great examples of this kind of thing at http://turnhere.com 
  - and if you sign up with Turn Here, you might get some work out of  
it!

The single most important thing to remember is to get good sound - do  
not use your camera mic.  Particularly if you have to film the  
workshop.  Bad, wild camera mic sound makes all video - however well  
shot - look cheap and bad.   Get him to wear a lapel mic with a long  
cable - or, if it's not possible in the venue to film him with a mic  
attached to your camera, use a separate digital recorder and then sync  
up sound and picture in the edit.

Good luck!

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 15 Jan 2010, at 18:24, loretabirkus wrote:

 Hello videobloggers,

 I've been reading your posts and I feel so far behind in my  
 knowledge :). But I hope I will catch up.

 I just recently started to do small videoblogs for small business  
 owners. I'm just stepping in to see if I really like doing it. I've  
 been filming and editing my family videos for a number of years now,  
 but I never did anything for other people up until a month ago. I  
 thought to give it a try and see if this could be something I can do  
 for a living.

 So..I have several questions, if you don't mind answering.

 1. I was asked to film a short 1-2 min clip for one small company.  
 The president does workshops for his clients and I'd like to get  
 some shots of that. However, I checked out the room where he's doing  
 the workshops and it's pretty dark, ceiling florescent lighting,  
 dark sand color walls and kind or cramped. I figured out the angle  
 from which I will film, but I'm afraid there won't be enough  
 lighting. I do have lights that I use for studio type picture taking  
 (2 of them) and I will bring those, but in order to get use of them,  
 they'd have to be upclose to people I guess. However, then the lamps  
 would be seen in the picture.
 How do you usually resolve the issue of lighting in small, having no  
 windows rooms? I was thinking about increasing the exposure as well  
 if I see that there's still not enough lighting with my both lamps  
 that I have. But any other ideas would be helpful.

 2. How do you film the details in such settings? Meaning, do you  
 have to zoom into the leader of the workshop (in this case), to zoom  
 into hands of people, their faces to capture their mood and  
 experience at this workshop? I want to get as much footage as  
 possible. I may not necessarily need to use it, I just want to be  
 covered and not worry about it during the editing process. I have  
 only one camera.

 3. And lastly, is there any way to increase the light while editing?  
 I'm using Sony Vegas Platinum 8 editing program. I haven't looked if  
 it has this feature. I thought I'd ask here first to get some input  
 and advice. I have one clip for another client that's a bit too  
 dark, in my opinion, and it's too late to get it re-filmed, so I was  
 wondering if there's any way that I can fix the light during editing.

 Thanks so much for reading this long email. I feel like an amateur  
 among you all professionals :)

 I'm sure I'll learn a lot here.

 Thanks.

 Have a great weekend.

 Cheers!
 Loreta

 p.s. Steve, I'll look for your book on Amazon! How amazing to get  
 published! Congrats!


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group

Re: [videoblogging] new to the group - question about filming

2010-01-15 Thread Rupert Howe

sorry, i meant i *would* try to avoid using the location...

On 15 Jan 2010, at 21:05, Rupert Howe wrote:

 I wouldn't try to avoid using the location if it's dark and ugly.   
 The combo of fluorescent ceiling lights and your studio lights may  
 not be very useful for a dark room full of people trying to do a  
 workshop (where your lighting needs are secondary).  Sounds quite  
 stressful and ultimately probably quite unattractive and unusable.   
 If it's a 1-2 minute film, you're probably not going to get a lot of  
 meaningful content from the workshop anyway, and these kind of  
 things always look a bit odd.

 So think around it: how can you explain the workshops without  
 showing them?  Can you get the guy to talk about what he does in  
 little snippets, and ask him to get former participants to give  
 testimonials to camera which you can intercut.  If you really need  
 to shoot him doing his thing, cheat and film just him speaking in a  
 nicer brighter location.  Get them outside where possible.  Think  
 about rigging up a white background (sheet or paper) to do his  
 presentation against.

 As far as what to film, personally I would get fairly close up to  
 faces - shooting zoomed in (on a long lens) can give a nice effect,  
 but don't include the actual zooming process in your edit, as zooms  
 make cheap videos look cheaper.

 Other details might be good for cutaways if you really need to show  
 a long piece from start to finish - but you're probably much better  
 just sticking to quick cuts.  To many cutaways, filler shots and  
 random details can be distracting and unhelpful.  Simplicity is  
 powerful!

 There are a lot of great examples of this kind of thing at 
 http://turnhere.com 
  - and if you sign up with Turn Here, you might get some work out of  
 it!

 The single most important thing to remember is to get good sound -  
 do not use your camera mic.  Particularly if you have to film the  
 workshop.  Bad, wild camera mic sound makes all video - however well  
 shot - look cheap and bad.   Get him to wear a lapel mic with a long  
 cable - or, if it's not possible in the venue to film him with a mic  
 attached to your camera, use a separate digital recorder and then  
 sync up sound and picture in the edit.

 Good luck!

 Rupert
 http://twittervlog.tv


 On 15 Jan 2010, at 18:24, loretabirkus wrote:

 Hello videobloggers,

 I've been reading your posts and I feel so far behind in my  
 knowledge :). But I hope I will catch up.

 I just recently started to do small videoblogs for small business  
 owners. I'm just stepping in to see if I really like doing it. I've  
 been filming and editing my family videos for a number of years  
 now, but I never did anything for other people up until a month  
 ago. I thought to give it a try and see if this could be something  
 I can do for a living.

 So..I have several questions, if you don't mind answering.

 1. I was asked to film a short 1-2 min clip for one small company.  
 The president does workshops for his clients and I'd like to get  
 some shots of that. However, I checked out the room where he's  
 doing the workshops and it's pretty dark, ceiling florescent  
 lighting, dark sand color walls and kind or cramped. I figured out  
 the angle from which I will film, but I'm afraid there won't be  
 enough lighting. I do have lights that I use for studio type  
 picture taking (2 of them) and I will bring those, but in order to  
 get use of them, they'd have to be upclose to people I guess.  
 However, then the lamps would be seen in the picture.
 How do you usually resolve the issue of lighting in small, having  
 no windows rooms? I was thinking about increasing the exposure as  
 well if I see that there's still not enough lighting with my both  
 lamps that I have. But any other ideas would be helpful.

 2. How do you film the details in such settings? Meaning, do you  
 have to zoom into the leader of the workshop (in this case), to  
 zoom into hands of people, their faces to capture their mood and  
 experience at this workshop? I want to get as much footage as  
 possible. I may not necessarily need to use it, I just want to be  
 covered and not worry about it during the editing process. I have  
 only one camera.

 3. And lastly, is there any way to increase the light while  
 editing? I'm using Sony Vegas Platinum 8 editing program. I haven't  
 looked if it has this feature. I thought I'd ask here first to get  
 some input and advice. I have one clip for another client that's a  
 bit too dark, in my opinion, and it's too late to get it re-filmed,  
 so I was wondering if there's any way that I can fix the light  
 during editing.

 Thanks so much for reading this long email. I feel like an amateur  
 among you all professionals :)

 I'm sure I'll learn a lot here.

 Thanks.

 Have a great weekend.

 Cheers!
 Loreta

 p.s. Steve, I'll look for your book on Amazon! How amazing to get  
 published! Congrats

Re: [videoblogging] My book was released on Amazon.com today

2010-01-12 Thread Rupert Howe

Congratulations!

And it's also available on Amazon.co.uk:
http://bit.ly/6PK1z8

More people than ever are starting out now.

Good luck with it :)

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 13 Jan 2010, at 01:01, Steve Garfield wrote:

 Hi,
 Just wanted to let you know that my book, Get Seen, was released on  
 Amazon.com today.

 My first post to this group was on June 6th, 2004.

 The first message in this group was June 1, 2004.

 Mine was the 6th message.

 It's been a wild ride from 2004 to 2010.

 I remember the first Vloggercon in NYC in 2005 and the second in SF  
 in 2006.

 My book is a nice how to guide for people starting out in online  
 video. For some of us who have been putting video on blogs wince  
 2004, it's seems so easy now.

 When we started there was no YouTube, we were worried that our  
 videos would get popular, because that would cost us money.

 Now we've got a myriad of free hosting solutions for have lots of  
 great features.

 But there still are and will always be people starting out.

 That's where my book comes in. In the book I talk about choosing a  
 camera, getting good sound and lighting, and how to conduct  
 interviews. Also, how to edit and post, and how to go live.

 I've interviewed a number of Yahoo! videoblogging group members.

 I made a post today called, Where To Buy Get Seen. It's a very  
 simple post showing where people can order the book.

 It's at:
 http://bit.ly/buy-getseen

 In addition to that the book has a website, http://stevegarfield.com/getseen

 Over there I'm posting video interviews that I made for the book and  
 there are discussion forums for people who read the book who might  
 have some questions.

 So that's it. Just wanted to drop by and give you guys an update.

 Thanks for your support.

 --Steve
 http://stevegarfield.com

 Author:
 Get Seen: Online Video Secrets
 http://stevegarfield.com/getseen

 Founder:
 Boston Media Makers
 http://bostonmediamakers.com

 Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/stevegarfield


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?

True.  But that's the very reason I see more and more people with  
Flips and Kodaks.  They like the idea of this phone-like flat object  
to slip in the pocket, that does both photos and HD video.

They don't want separate chunky video camera and stills camera, if  
they can have both in one.

Up til now, people have assumed all-in-one devices are sub-standard -  
eg that the video on a Canon pocket stills camera can't be any good -  
when actually, it's probably brighter and clearer than their $400  
video camera.

Hard for most people to choose between Flip and Kodak, though.  The  
extra features like mic in don't mean much to them.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 12 Jan 2010, at 03:19, David Jones wrote:

 On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Joly MacFie j...@punkcast.com  
 wrote:
 
  But this is my point, the flipHD fits in the pocket, costs $150, and
  all the editing one might need is built in to the software - hey it
  even has magic movie to make your edit decisions! It's instant
  videoblogging for the masses!

 the masses don't want to carry around yet another device!

 Dave.

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Mystery

Chrome supports both h264 and ogg theora for the video tag.

I think the browser upgrade thing is key to takeup of this.  Too many  
people still have older version browsers.  But in the meantime,  
hopefully it'll get used by more  more people doing cool interactive  
experiments.  I guess the other thing that will have an impact is what  
kind of browsers and interfaces are built into internet TV sets and  
set-top-boxes.

On 11 Jan 2010, at 20:42, elbowsofdeath wrote:

 It seems to be using html5 video tag and including links to  
 both .mp4 and ogg versions of videos on archive.org. So if I look at  
 it using safari, I get the mp4 version, I assume I would get the ogg  
 if I used a recent firefox, and for other browsers it may fallback  
 to flash.

 Im sure we would have had a lot more techie talk about this, and  
 seen a lot more of it in use, if this era were not dominated by  
 video hosting services that have added lots of other stuff to their  
 flash-based players.

 Maybe we will still see more of it once the video tag support in  
 browsers is more mature, and certainly there may be some interest  
 from people who like to DIY and would like their page to serve up  
 video in the way best suited to the viewers browser or device. Its  
 an extension of the 'serve a h264 in a flash player for most  
 browsers but have code on the page so that iphone users can get the  
 same h264 video but without the flash player' concept. Easy to build  
 on that to also serve h264 without flash for safari, easy to serve  
 ogg for firefox, just a shame that entails having to have your  
 videos in another format as well, something that will put some off.

 Does anyone know what Google Chrome browsers appraoch to the video  
 tag is, does it support it and if so which codecs?

 Cheers

 Steve
 --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jay dedman jay.ded...@...  
 wrote:
 
  Does anyone know who made this site?
  http://alpha.publicvideos.org
 
  Its very cool...seems to use Ogg format.
 
  Jay
 
  --
  http://ryanishungry.com
  http://momentshowing.net
  http://twitter.com/jaydedman
  917 371 6790
 


 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of internet TV videoblogging

It recently occurred to me that the advent of Touch Screen technology  
is the reason Apple rebuilt iMovie a couple of years ago.  The new  
format is perfect for touch screen editing.  If it works, expect more  
NLEs to experiment with this stuff in the next few years, especially  
if iMacs start to go Touch Screen.

I think 2010 is the year of internet and TV convergence - lots of new  
set top boxes and many TVs sold will be internet-capable.  I think, in  
terms of usefulness, this will be much more important than the 3D TV  
hype we're hearing at the moment.  The tablet will play its part in  
this, making video more portable  watchable.

And I think the one original format for internet TV is the  
videoblogging style.  Expect to see a lot of nicely produced shows of  
bubbly people talking to camera about any number of subjects.

If you follow what's hot week-to-week on YouTube, there are music  
videos, trailers, fails, sport, tv clips and amazing feats.  All of  
which are just recorded from TV or produced for MSM.

The only original stuff that regularly makes it to the top is  
personality videoblogging.  Ze Frank style.  Fast cuts, high energy.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 11 Jan 2010, at 18:34, Jay dedman wrote:

 On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 11:42 AM, elbowsofdeath  
 st...@dvmachine.com wrote:
  Belated new years greetings to all, Ive not been keeping up with  
 the list much in the last year or so but am back again for now...

 good to see yu again Steve. We all go through little phases with the
 group. Important to go out and do research then come back and discuss.

  So, is this going to be the year that the tablet form factor  
 finally takes off? And if so, will it have many implications for  
 vlogging?
  Assuming that Apple are going to announce a tablet/slate/call it  
 what you will near the end of the month, and knowing that other  
 companies have been showing off tablets or assocaited technology  
 recently (eg Microsoft, HP, nvidia), I guess there are 3 areas where  
 this could have implications for vlogging:
  Mobile editing - perhaps the larger screen, more power   
 multitouch will refresh the mobile editing experience in a good way?
  New viewing device/habits/resolution - Assume device will be at  
 least 720p res (eg 1280x800), perhaps even full HD. Smaller videos  
 will probably still look quite nice but maybe this stuff will  
 encourage more HD content? Not sure if people watching on tablets  
 will increase demand for web video or cange the potential audience   
 their habits much?
  Beginnings of a new sleeker web, 3D  multitouch or at least flash- 
 free 2d slickness?
  Ive been wanting to develop web stuff for a suitable tablet for  
 years now, although I must confess that since youtube, facebook   
 twitter came to dominate Ive become very unclear about what is next  
 for the web and what services people might actually need.

 As recent history has shown, I think it'll be Apple that will set the
 tone for videoon the tablet. I'd love a touch screen to use with FCP.
 Video editing would become a little more tactile. But as much as I
 love Final Cut Pro, Apple has emphasized the viewing and consumption
 of media vs the actual creation. It'll be interesting to see if the
 Tablet focuses on buying movies/books from iTunes to consume...or
 helps you create better.

 overall though, it's a pretty exciting time mainly because of the web
 has gotten faster...and it's much easier to move video around. Plus
 people are now used to watching video online. Big changes from 5 years
 ago.

 Jay

 --
 http://ryanishungry.com
 http://momentshowing.net
 http://twitter.com/jaydedman
 917 371 6790

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





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:
videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [videoblogging] 2010 the year of the flip?