[videoblogging] Re: 12seconds.tv
This conversation actually came up ON Seesmic "back in the day". There was a suggestion to limit responses to 90 seconds. This would have been intelligent for the reason that there were conversations that were branching out faster than viewers could consume the material. For instance... One person says "I comb my dog's hair to the left", and then someone responds "I comb it to the right". Meanwhile, a third person is replying to the first commment and leaving a ten-minute explanation about dog-grooming. By the time you watched the short video and the ten-minute video, there were already eight more responses on a couple of different tangents, some of which were ALSO 5 or 6 minutes long. On top of that, if you wanted to make your own response to someone's post, you missed out on all of the new posts that you then had to go back and watch, etc etc etc... Making a limitation of 90 seconds would have been a good idea if they were trying to emulate twitter and have people receive a limited amount of time to express themselves. 12 seconds is too short. It's like playing some cryptic game. 90 seconds was more of a "you're babbling" cutoff suggestion, not such a stringent restriction. Bill Cammack http://billcammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "schlomo rabinowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yeah, Ive been on it a bit; theres a couple others on this list using it as > well. I'm still having problems with the 12sec limit..sometimes I need > 17secs to accomadate all my "umms and uhhs". > One thing good about it, is that it works and does what it says it does! > > by the time I get to the page, turn on my cam, etc.. I just want to do > whatever im doing for the time it takes me to do it; which SHOULD only be > 12secs, but rarely is. > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:36 AM, darbycoin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > has anyone else checked this out? i see that they're trying to take > > the success (if you will) of seesmic and combine it what that of > > twitter (its brevity). but are we really that ADD that we NEED to > > compress the time frame to 12 seconds? i think its novel but that's > > about it. > > > > as a culture - we're all about expedience - but in condensing and > > condensing the time frames in which we communicate are we changing how > > we communicate? personally - i've been watching a lot of longer > > format films/documentaries/etc lately because i've been feeling a need > > for something with depth/breadth/context/landscape. > > > > do you see value in 12seconds.tv? or is it just another niche thing. > > > > cheers > > scott > > > > > > > > > > -- > Schlomo Rabinowitz > http://schlomolog.blogspot.com > http://hatfactory.net > AIM:schlomochat > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
[videoblogging] Re: 12seconds.tv
Unfortunately - most people aren't funny enough for that 12 seconds to be worth while. Instead of a cream pie in the face and everyone laughing - it's more like watching some kids doing whippits and staring at the camera saying - i'm a importan', people know me. watch out. (end of transmission) --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think it's a niche, but I understand the ADD production mentality. > For Dragon*ConTV, we have a maximum time limit of two minutes for a > clip. Most of what we produce is 30 seconds in length (due to spoofing > commercials). We make exceptions for our few music videos, but the > main video clips are time limited. > > Audience ADD is one reason we set the time limit. People come & go at > Dragon*Con events, so a 10 minute joke won't work there (yeah, we > produce for a live audience as well as an internet audience ... very > rare these days). > > The really big reason we set the time limit is comedic punch ... what > I call the "hit them with a cream pie and run" rule. Some of the ideas > we have are funny when they're short, but hard to flesh out in a > longer spot. And, if you try to stretch the joke, it's like chewing > the same piece of gum for too long ... eventually the flavor dies and > it ends up on the bottom of someone else's shoe. We describe it as > "SNL Syndrome" (many Saturday Night Live jokes would be funnier if > they stopped sooner). > > Robot Chicken excels at the 10 second gag. It's not the entire show, > but ti works for some of their jokes. Short and funny has it's place, > unless it's Verne Troyer in yet another Mike Myers movie. > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:36 AM, darbycoin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > has anyone else checked this out? i see that they're trying to take > > the success (if you will) of seesmic and combine it what that of > > twitter (its brevity). but are we really that ADD that we NEED to > > compress the time frame to 12 seconds? i think its novel but that's > > about it. > > > > as a culture - we're all about expedience - but in condensing and > > condensing the time frames in which we communicate are we changing how > > we communicate? personally - i've been watching a lot of longer > > format films/documentaries/etc lately because i've been feeling a need > > for something with depth/breadth/context/landscape. > > > > do you see value in 12seconds.tv? or is it just another niche thing. > > > > cheers > > scott > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Brian Richardson > - http://siliconchef.com > - http://dragoncontv.com > - http://whatthecast.com > - http://www.3chip.com >
Re: [videoblogging] Re: 12seconds.tv
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Renat Zarbailov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This 12 second thing will make people talk like robots or like those > voiceover guys at the end of informercials. When you tell something, > pauses are essential for the listener to memorize and visualize your > story. > idontknowwhatyouretalkingaboutithinkyoucangetthepointacrossinashortperiodoftime ... yeah, this could be annoying :) Brian Richardson - http://siliconchef.com - http://dragoncontv.com - http://whatthecast.com - http://www.3chip.com
[videoblogging] Re: 12seconds.tv
This 12 second thing will make people talk like robots or like those voiceover guys at the end of informercials. When you tell something, pauses are essential for the listener to memorize and visualize your story. my 12 cents Renat of Innomind.org --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "darbycoin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > has anyone else checked this out? i see that they're trying to take > the success (if you will) of seesmic and combine it what that of > twitter (its brevity). but are we really that ADD that we NEED to > compress the time frame to 12 seconds? i think its novel but that's > about it. > > as a culture - we're all about expedience - but in condensing and > condensing the time frames in which we communicate are we changing how > we communicate? personally - i've been watching a lot of longer > format films/documentaries/etc lately because i've been feeling a need > for something with depth/breadth/context/landscape. > > do you see value in 12seconds.tv? or is it just another niche thing. > > cheers > scott >
