[videoblogging] choral
Here a very interessing work http://www.austinmbwillis.com/VideoChoir1Web.mov Enjoy Loiez Loiez Deniel http://www.loiez.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] ! new cell phone : +33 06 08 31 96 98 Skype : ultimcodex M'appeler gratuitement de votre PC sur mon portable http://call.mylivio.com/loiez
[videoblogging] Wall Color
I'd like some suggestions on the color to paint the wall in our training studio that we use as a backdrop for our training videos. We are getting half of the studio astroturfed and are looking to do s serious training DVD. I've been leaning towards a vibrant, rich blue for the wall colors, but I'm not sure. Any suggestions or other information would be appreciated. peace, ron
Re: [videoblogging] Wall Color
Astroturf in your studio. How cool is that? I want to get my office astroturfed. Plain bright white is quite a useful colour to paint studio walls, if they're very smooth and especially because you have highish ceilings. White backgrounded videos and photos are ubiquitous - people always seem to respond well to that studio aesthetic. I got big white and black paper rolls installed in a client's studio in London and they get a lot of use out of them now. On the other hand you could paint them a chroma key blue. Then you could choose to have a blue background or digitally insert different backgrounds. I don't know much about the practicality and cost of that, but you'd find a mass of information on it via Google. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 29-Aug-08, at 6:48 AM, Ron Watson wrote: I'd like some suggestions on the color to paint the wall in our training studio that we use as a backdrop for our training videos. We are getting half of the studio astroturfed and are looking to do s serious training DVD. I've been leaning towards a vibrant, rich blue for the wall colors, but I'm not sure. Any suggestions or other information would be appreciated. peace, ron [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Flickr Creative Commons (also video-sharing sites Creative Commons)
I have a Flickr account, have been uploading pictures. No image watermark like COPYRIGHT ©2008 my name. I want to confirm that people can't use my photos without permission. Can someone summarize what my rights are? Some clown deliberately used my photo is taunting me on a forum that he can do it. A bunch of his redneck friends are openly harassing me, threatening me. They are saying something to the effect an image made publicly available, is fair game. Uh, no. There is a modification of Copyright Law (Berne convention, forgot what year), where as soon as the photo is made..it's automatically copyrighted. PHotographer owns photo. HOwever, there are other factors determining what a photographer can sue for, when infringed. Statutory damages, etc. Can someone clarify this for me, given photo/video sharing websites Creative Commons licenses? Here is what I found on Flickr: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flickr Licensing Flickr offers users the ability to release their images under certain common usage licenses. The licensing options primarily include the Creative Commons 2.0 attribution-based and minor content-control licenses - although jurisdiction and version-specific licenses cannot be selected. As with tags, the site allows easy searching of only those images that fall under a specific license.[19] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Flickr Creative Commons (also video-sharing sites Creative Commons)
It could help a bit if you told us what picture, and where it's being used, and even gave a link to the forum where he's taunting you. Flickr allows you to set permissions on your photos. I believe it's All Rights Reserved by default, and that you can manually set various levels of Creative Commons permissions individually for each photo or by default. Without seeing the photo page on Flickr, I can't tell what licence you've issued for the picture. Probably All Rights Reserved, but if you've changed it to Creative Commons then he has certain rights to reuse it according to what licence you used. If All Rights Reserved, then he can't use your photo without your permission, whatever he says. A simple Google search would confirm this to you and him. You can Google about your rights under the DMCA, and issue him with a formal notice to stop using your image, also his web host, or whatever service he's using to steal it. But again, more info - and if you want some of us to go to the forum to back you up and discuss it with him, post a link. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 29-Aug-08, at 8:21 PM, B Yen wrote: I have a Flickr account, have been uploading pictures. No image watermark like COPYRIGHT ©2008 my name. I want to confirm that people can't use my photos without permission. Can someone summarize what my rights are? Some clown deliberately used my photo is taunting me on a forum that he can do it. A bunch of his redneck friends are openly harassing me, threatening me. They are saying something to the effect an image made publicly available, is fair game. Uh, no. There is a modification of Copyright Law (Berne convention, forgot what year), where as soon as the photo is made..it's automatically copyrighted. PHotographer owns photo. HOwever, there are other factors determining what a photographer can sue for, when infringed. Statutory damages, etc. Can someone clarify this for me, given photo/video sharing websites Creative Commons licenses? Here is what I found on Flickr: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flickr Licensing Flickr offers users the ability to release their images under certain common usage licenses. The licensing options primarily include the Creative Commons 2.0 attribution-based and minor content-control licenses - although jurisdiction and version-specific licenses cannot be selected. As with tags, the site allows easy searching of only those images that fall under a specific license.[19] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
