Re: [MCN-L] Video hosting question

[Ellice Engdahl]

Just wanted to thank all those who provided their thoughts on this question.  
The accessibility comments are also exceedingly welcome, so no worries about 
thread hijacking. :-)

It's a lot to chew on, and while it's hard for me to picture a world where we 
totally move away from YouTube (like Google, Facebook, [insert name of giant 
tech platform here], it's where the most eyeballs are...), it's sounding like 
private hosting also has some advantages of its own.  I will share all your 
thoughts with my colleagues and we'll see where we go from here!

If others have additional/different/similar thoughts, please consider sending 
those my way.

Thanks!

Ellice

.
Ellice Engdahl, PMP
Manager, Digital Collections & Content
P: 313.982.6005
E: elli...@thehenryford.org
.

From: Ellice Engdahl
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2019 9:28 AM
To: mcn-l@mcn.edu
Subject: Video hosting question

Hello, all,

While we have plenty of "modern" video out on YouTube, we currently host most 
our historic and collections-item videos (e.g. oral history video clips) on a 
private streaming platform.  We don't use much of the functionality provided by 
the private platform, so the question has come up whether YouTube would meet 
our needs as a player.

Some questions/potential concerns that have passed through my head:


  1.  Are there potentially different copyright implications to private hosting 
than to YouTube?  What if we made the YouTube videos unlisted so we were simply 
using it as a player?
  2.  Has anyone had (or is/was concerned about having) historic video 
challenged or taken down as in violation of YouTube's community standards?

Can anyone weigh in on these?  And are there other issues to contemplate that I 
am missing?  If the people at your institution who would make such decisions 
are not on the MCN listserv, I'd love it if you'd pass this along to them-I 
will take any and all input, on- or off-list.

If you've chosen to use a private streaming service in addition to or instead 
of YouTube, I'd be interested to know what additional value you think it brings.

Thanks!

.
Gain Perspective. Get Inspired. Make History.

Ellice Engdahl, PMP
Manager, Digital Collections & Content
P: 313.982.6005
E: elli...@thehenryford.org

www.thehenryford.org
.

The Henry Ford
20900 Oakwood Boulevard
Dearborn, MI 48124

___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/

Re: [MCN-L] Video hosting question

[David Ertel]

I also recommend Vimeo Pro for certain use cases, especially for static
sites or promotional sites. I can confirm that with Vimeo Pro you can
access signed URLs of the actual transcoded video files which you can use
to embed the video via the  tag or a third party player.

On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 8:43 AM Sina Bahram  wrote:

> +1 on Vimeo pro over YouTube when it comes to business concerns, but there
> definitely can be some accessibility issues with their native video player;
> however, I believe that other video players such as VideoJS, AblePlayer,
> etc. can be backed by a Vimeo video, though this would require verification.
>
>
> President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc.
> Phone: 919-345-3832
> https://www.PAC.bz
> Twitter: @SinaBahram
> Personal Website: https://www.sinabahram.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: mcn-l  On Behalf Of hoplist
> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 11:04 AM
> To: Museum Computer Network Listserv 
> Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Video hosting question
>
>
> > On Oct 15, 2019, at 9:12 AM, Matt Morgan 
> wrote:
> >
> > It's worth mentioning Vimeo Pro,
> >
> > https://vimeo.com/professionals 
> >
> > which is super cheap compared to self-hosting or the enterprise video
> providers but does everything most people want.
>
> I second Vimeo Pro and have used it for years. YouTube is a promotional
> platform and its pretty much the only game in town if promotion is your
> goal. But YouTube is a terrible host. It’s only advantage as a host is that
> it is free.
>
> Vimeo Pro is inexpensive and offers sufficient tools to be a proper host
> service. My one complaint is that its video management tools leave a great
> deal to be desired.
>
> Cheers,
>tod
>
>
> ___
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer
> Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
>
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu
>
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
>
> The MCN-L archives can be found at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/
>
> ___
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer
> Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
>
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu
>
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
>
> The MCN-L archives can be found at:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/
>
___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/

Re: [MCN-L] Video hosting question

[Sina Bahram]

+1 on Vimeo pro over YouTube when it comes to business concerns, but there 
definitely can be some accessibility issues with their native video player; 
however, I believe that other video players such as VideoJS, AblePlayer, etc. 
can be backed by a Vimeo video, though this would require verification.


President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc.
Phone: 919-345-3832
https://www.PAC.bz
Twitter: @SinaBahram
Personal Website: https://www.sinabahram.com

-Original Message-
From: mcn-l  On Behalf Of hoplist
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 11:04 AM
To: Museum Computer Network Listserv 
Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Video hosting question


> On Oct 15, 2019, at 9:12 AM, Matt Morgan  wrote:
> 
> It's worth mentioning Vimeo Pro, 
> 
> https://vimeo.com/professionals 
> 
> which is super cheap compared to self-hosting or the enterprise video 
> providers but does everything most people want. 

I second Vimeo Pro and have used it for years. YouTube is a promotional 
platform and its pretty much the only game in town if promotion is your goal. 
But YouTube is a terrible host. It’s only advantage as a host is that it is 
free.

Vimeo Pro is inexpensive and offers sufficient tools to be a proper host 
service. My one complaint is that its video management tools leave a great deal 
to be desired.

Cheers,
   tod


___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/

___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/

Re: [MCN-L] Captioning Suggestions

[Sina Bahram]

this is a fantastic list of resources, justifications, and advice. Simply 
awesome.

thank you, Tod, for sending this.



President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc.
Phone: 919-345-3832
https://www.PAC.bz
Twitter: @SinaBahram
Personal Website: https://www.sinabahram.com

-Original Message-
From: mcn-l  On Behalf Of hoplist
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 10:54 AM
To: Museum Computer Network Listserv 
Subject: [MCN-L] Captioning Suggestions

Some suggestions for approaching captions:

Don’t blindly auto-caption. If you rely on YouTube auto-captioning, you should 
invest a small amount of time in learning to use YouTube's caption editor to 
review and correct your captions. Bad captions are worse than useless and 
terrible for your image. 

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2734705?hl=en

I personally find YouTube's caption tools clumsy and do not use them. YouTube 
captioning does not meet my standards. Whether it meets some standard of 
“minimal” compliance is a subject of heated debate, but they don’t properly 
represent my company or my clients.

The point is that captions represent you. The issue is not simply “compliance.” 
Try watching your auto-captioned programs with the sound off. Are they helping, 
or are they just a distraction? Keep in mind that many people with perfectly 
good hearing turn on captioning. My wife turns on captions when the baby is 
sleeping for instance. People for whom English is a second language turn on 
captions. And people on the subway, because they forgot headphones, or just 
because it’s noisy. 

So, better ideas, in ascending order of quality-cost-effort:

I use a variety of services for transcription and captioning depending on need, 
but the cheapest is www.temi.com  (about ten cents a minute) which provides 
very cheap automated transcription along with a powerful and easy to use cloud 
based editing and sharing solution. It’s great when the audio is clear and 
straight-forward. The transcript is cheap, and if the audio is good, editing is 
simple. This works fine for simple programs with one or two voices at a time: 
presentations, interviews, narrated programs.

When the program audio is more complex or the audio is poor or the subjects 
have accents or their are multiple languages, you need a human.

For inexpensive human transcription, there’s Rev.com and similar online 
services (about $1 per minute) which replace computers with humans, but are 
otherwise quite similar.  I suspect many are actually the same company behind 
different front ends. Rev.com does NOT replace a dedicated captioning service, 
but it does add humans to the mix. These services are accurate, but they are 
not captioning experts and don't combine your captions with video for you.

Real, proper captioning is not transcription. It is an art. If you want to 
understand the difference, and why it matters, start here.

https://www.captioningkey.org/quality_captioning.html

You can do captions yourself. I’ve trained many interns to caption. It takes a 
few days to train someone with decent grammar skills to handle basic captions, 
and I always review and edit them.

I prefer an application called Inqscribe, available for both Mac and PC, but 
not particularly cheap and arguably not the easiest. This is predominately a 
transcription tool (an excellent one) but it can be used for captions even if 
the transcript comes from elsewhere.

There’s also Jubler, which is free and a dedicated captioning program. If 
Jubler had existed when I started, it might be my preferred tool.

And don’t discount full service companies just because they cost money. They 
are, on balance, pretty cheap, all things considered. Remember, time is money 
and they work MUCH faster than you can. Good captions are like any good 
writing, both a skill and an art, and expertise matters. 

I notice good captioning and I must assume I am not alone. Just last week I 
commented to my wife (baby asleep, captions on) that a program had exceptional 
captions and I wished I could find out who did them.

Cheers,
 tod





___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/

___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/

Re: [MCN-L] Video hosting question

[hoplist]

> On Oct 15, 2019, at 9:12 AM, Matt Morgan  wrote:
> 
> It's worth mentioning Vimeo Pro, 
> 
> https://vimeo.com/professionals 
> 
> which is super cheap compared to self-hosting or the enterprise video 
> providers but does everything most people want. 

I second Vimeo Pro and have used it for years. YouTube is a promotional 
platform and its pretty much the only game in town if promotion is your goal. 
But YouTube is a terrible host. It’s only advantage as a host is that it is 
free.

Vimeo Pro is inexpensive and offers sufficient tools to be a proper host 
service. My one complaint is that its video management tools leave a great deal 
to be desired.

Cheers,
   tod


___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/

[MCN-L] Captioning Suggestions

[hoplist]

Some suggestions for approaching captions:

Don’t blindly auto-caption. If you rely on YouTube auto-captioning, you should 
invest a small amount of time in learning to use YouTube's caption editor to 
review and correct your captions. Bad captions are worse than useless and 
terrible for your image. 

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2734705?hl=en

I personally find YouTube's caption tools clumsy and do not use them. YouTube 
captioning does not meet my standards. Whether it meets some standard of 
“minimal” compliance is a subject of heated debate, but they don’t properly 
represent my company or my clients.

The point is that captions represent you. The issue is not simply “compliance.” 
Try watching your auto-captioned programs with the sound off. Are they helping, 
or are they just a distraction? Keep in mind that many people with perfectly 
good hearing turn on captioning. My wife turns on captions when the baby is 
sleeping for instance. People for whom English is a second language turn on 
captions. And people on the subway, because they forgot headphones, or just 
because it’s noisy. 

So, better ideas, in ascending order of quality-cost-effort:

I use a variety of services for transcription and captioning depending on need, 
but the cheapest is www.temi.com  (about ten cents a minute) which provides 
very cheap automated transcription along with a powerful and easy to use cloud 
based editing and sharing solution. It’s great when the audio is clear and 
straight-forward. The transcript is cheap, and if the audio is good, editing is 
simple. This works fine for simple programs with one or two voices at a time: 
presentations, interviews, narrated programs.

When the program audio is more complex or the audio is poor or the subjects 
have accents or their are multiple languages, you need a human.

For inexpensive human transcription, there’s Rev.com and similar online 
services (about $1 per minute) which replace computers with humans, but are 
otherwise quite similar.  I suspect many are actually the same company behind 
different front ends. Rev.com does NOT replace a dedicated captioning service, 
but it does add humans to the mix. These services are accurate, but they are 
not captioning experts and don't combine your captions with video for you.

Real, proper captioning is not transcription. It is an art. If you want to 
understand the difference, and why it matters, start here.

https://www.captioningkey.org/quality_captioning.html

You can do captions yourself. I’ve trained many interns to caption. It takes a 
few days to train someone with decent grammar skills to handle basic captions, 
and I always review and edit them.

I prefer an application called Inqscribe, available for both Mac and PC, but 
not particularly cheap and arguably not the easiest. This is predominately a 
transcription tool (an excellent one) but it can be used for captions even if 
the transcript comes from elsewhere.

There’s also Jubler, which is free and a dedicated captioning program. If 
Jubler had existed when I started, it might be my preferred tool.

And don’t discount full service companies just because they cost money. They 
are, on balance, pretty cheap, all things considered. Remember, time is money 
and they work MUCH faster than you can. Good captions are like any good 
writing, both a skill and an art, and expertise matters. 

I notice good captioning and I must assume I am not alone. Just last week I 
commented to my wife (baby asleep, captions on) that a program had exceptional 
captions and I wished I could find out who did them.

Cheers,
 tod





___
You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer 
Network (http://www.mcn.edu)

To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu

To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l

The MCN-L archives can be found at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/

Re: [MCN-L] Video hosting question

[Matt Morgan]

It's worth mentioning Vimeo Pro, 

https://vimeo.com/professionals

which is super cheap compared to self-hosting or the enterprise video providers 
but does everything most people want. You still probably need to be on Youtube 
to reach the crowds there, but you may find Vimeo is better for embeds and 
sharing, plus the pro accounts give you control over all the little things 
(junk promoted at the end etc).

-- 
  Matt Morgan
  m...@concretecomputing.com

On Tue, Oct 15, 2019, at 8:25 AM, Bryan Kennedy wrote:
> Don't mean to take this thread in a new direction, but cielo24 is a
> fantastic machine captioning tool for video (and audio).
> 
> https://cielo24.com/
> 
> Like YT and other machine learning systems, it's far from perfect, but the
> cost is pennies per hour of video and allows you to browse videos by
> machine generated keywords. It even groups text sections into estimated
> topics. You can click on these words in the transcription and jump to the
> video section.
> 
> We use it as a first pass for most videos we use online and in exhibits
> before we even do the edit. It's helpful for the team doing a rough content
> edit on interviews. The rough transcriptions are a useful starting point
> for human cleanup of the captions and translation work as well.
> 
> bk
> 
> bryan kennedy
> director, museum technology & digital operations
> science museum of minnesota
> bkenn...@smm.org   651.221.2522
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 12:47 PM Matt Popke 
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Ellice,
> >
> > We have a lot of video currently hosted on YouTube at the DAM. We're still
> > using it for some purpose, but we've recently been moving away from it for
> > some purposes, as well.
> >
> > Regarding copyright: I think the biggest risk of copyright issues on
> > youtube is that it has a very large audience and automated takedown systems
> > regularly scan the content there. It's just more likely that some automated
> > system will flag a video—any video—for takedown, often incorrectly. It
> > really depends on what you're putting up there.
> >
> > The reason we're moving away from youtube for much of our content has more
> > to do with YouTube's recommendation algorithm and the decreasing amount of
> > control we have over YouTube embeds in web pages. There is currently no way
> > to reliably turn off the grid of recommendations that appears in a youtube
> > video after it has finished playing. It used to be an API feature that we
> > could decide to enable or disable depending on our use case, but lately the
> > grid just appears whether we like it or not.
> >
> > We have no control over what shows up in those recommendations, and a
> > significant amount of the content on YouTube is problematic in one way or
> > another (extremism, racism, violence, etc.). We don't want to appear to the
> > unitiated user as though we are tacitly supporting or recommending whatever
> > YouTube's algorithm decides to show when our video is done playing.
> >
> > It's different for video that is viewed on YouTube's site. Users know who
> > is running the show there. But increasingly, when embedding video content
> > on web pages we are using Vimeo because we have more control over the
> > embeds.
> >
> > Also, as YouTube continues to pursue monetization strategies that
> > privilege ads and advertisers, we anticipate service changes that would be
> > at odds with our goals as an institution. It's easier to start moving to a
> > different service now when we have time to adjust then to find ourselves
> > moving to that service in a panicked rush after changes occur. The benefit
> > of paying for a video hosting service is you know what you are getting and
> > can be more assured that, aside from possible price increases, the service
> > isn't going to pull the rug out from under you without warning.
> >
> > Matt Popke
> > Developer
> > 720.913.0126
> > mpo...@denverartmuseum.org
> >
> >
> > On 10/14/19, 07:32, "mcn-l on behalf of Ellice Engdahl" <
> > mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu on behalf of elli...@thehenryford.org> wrote:
> >
> > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do
> > not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and
> > know the content is safe.
> >
> >
> > Hello, all,
> >
> > While we have plenty of "modern" video out on YouTube, we currently
> > host most our historic and collections-item videos (e.g. oral history video
> > clips) on a private streaming platform.  We don't use much of the
> > functionality provided by the private platform, so the question has come up
> > whether YouTube would meet our needs as a player.
> >
> > Some questions/potential concerns that have passed through my head:
> >
> >
> >   1.  Are there potentially different copyright implications to
> > private hosting than to YouTube?  What if we made the YouTube videos
> > unlisted so we 

Re: [MCN-L] Video hosting question

[Bryan Kennedy]

Don't mean to take this thread in a new direction, but cielo24 is a
fantastic machine captioning tool for video (and audio).

https://cielo24.com/

Like YT and other machine learning systems, it's far from perfect, but the
cost is pennies per hour of video and allows you to browse videos by
machine generated keywords. It even groups text sections into estimated
topics. You can click on these words in the transcription and jump to the
video section.

We use it as a first pass for most videos we use online and in exhibits
before we even do the edit. It's helpful for the team doing a rough content
edit on interviews. The rough transcriptions are a useful starting point
for human cleanup of the captions and translation work as well.

bk

bryan kennedy
director, museum technology & digital operations
science museum of minnesota
bkenn...@smm.org   651.221.2522



On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 12:47 PM Matt Popke 
wrote:

> Hi Ellice,
>
> We have a lot of video currently hosted on YouTube at the DAM. We're still
> using it for some purpose, but we've recently been moving away from it for
> some purposes, as well.
>
> Regarding copyright: I think the biggest risk of copyright issues on
> youtube is that it has a very large audience and automated takedown systems
> regularly scan the content there. It's just more likely that some automated
> system will flag a video—any video—for takedown, often incorrectly. It
> really depends on what you're putting up there.
>
> The reason we're moving away from youtube for much of our content has more
> to do with YouTube's recommendation algorithm and the decreasing amount of
> control we have over YouTube embeds in web pages. There is currently no way
> to reliably turn off the grid of recommendations that appears in a youtube
> video after it has finished playing. It used to be an API feature that we
> could decide to enable or disable depending on our use case, but lately the
> grid just appears whether we like it or not.
>
> We have no control over what shows up in those recommendations, and a
> significant amount of the content on YouTube is problematic in one way or
> another (extremism, racism, violence, etc.). We don't want to appear to the
> unitiated user as though we are tacitly supporting or recommending whatever
> YouTube's algorithm decides to show when our video is done playing.
>
> It's different for video that is viewed on YouTube's site. Users know who
> is running the show there. But increasingly, when embedding video content
> on web pages we are using Vimeo because we have more control over the
> embeds.
>
> Also, as YouTube continues to pursue monetization strategies that
> privilege ads and advertisers, we anticipate service changes that would be
> at odds with our goals as an institution. It's easier to start moving to a
> different service now when we have time to adjust then to find ourselves
> moving to that service in a panicked rush after changes occur. The benefit
> of paying for a video hosting service is you know what you are getting and
> can be more assured that, aside from possible price increases, the service
> isn't going to pull the rug out from under you without warning.
>
> Matt Popke
> Developer
> 720.913.0126
> mpo...@denverartmuseum.org
>
>
> On 10/14/19, 07:32, "mcn-l on behalf of Ellice Engdahl" <
> mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu on behalf of elli...@thehenryford.org> wrote:
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do
> not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and
> know the content is safe.
>
>
> Hello, all,
>
> While we have plenty of "modern" video out on YouTube, we currently
> host most our historic and collections-item videos (e.g. oral history video
> clips) on a private streaming platform.  We don't use much of the
> functionality provided by the private platform, so the question has come up
> whether YouTube would meet our needs as a player.
>
> Some questions/potential concerns that have passed through my head:
>
>
>   1.  Are there potentially different copyright implications to
> private hosting than to YouTube?  What if we made the YouTube videos
> unlisted so we were simply using it as a player?
>   2.  Has anyone had (or is/was concerned about having) historic video
> challenged or taken down as in violation of YouTube's community standards?
>
> Can anyone weigh in on these?  And are there other issues to
> contemplate that I am missing?  If the people at your institution who would
> make such decisions are not on the MCN listserv, I'd love it if you'd pass
> this along to them-I will take any and all input, on- or off-list.
>
> If you've chosen to use a private streaming service in addition to or
> instead of YouTube, I'd be interested to know what additional value you
> think it brings.
>
> Thanks!
>
> .