Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:28 PM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? You are absolutely right. We don't need them. I don't understand why independent producers want the NBCs of this world to hire them or join the revolution. Funk them. If it is about money, then charge money for your shows, do a premium paid content channel to accompany what you are giving away for free, create and sell courseware, books, DVDs, reach out to small businesses who cannot afford to advertise on the big networks. Help them create brand following on the Internet. Take a look at Gary Vaynerchuk's Wine Library TV or Stormhoek http://www.stormhoek.com/blog/ Whining about big bad networks with get you nowhere. -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 7:01 AM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: of interest... http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/11/13/online-video-wheres-the-money/ Is advertising the only way to monetize on-line videos that all those bright people in the Valley can think of? I watched one of the Web 2.0 gurus recently admit that the startups need to experiment with new revenue models now, like... e-commerce. -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv -- Roxanne Darling o ke kai means of the sea in hawaiian Join us at the reef! Mermaid videos, geeks talking, and lots more http://reef.beachwalks.tv 808-384-5554 Video -- http://www.beachwalks.tv Company -- http://www.barefeetstudios.com Twitter-- http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out on opportunites to take on serialized content that has establushed communities that are alpha-recommending products and services left and right. Networks miss out, content creators miss out, time is wasted, common sense goes by the wayside. Both sides are hurting in their own ways with inprecedented losses and/or difficulty finding revanue. Frustrating to the max, considering it doesn't have to be like this. Being compared to cat pissing on toilet videomakers is ego-related, but it certainly doesn't help the situation to be seen by so-called tastemakers this way. So yeah, they don't owe us anything, but it doesn't make the siutation any less absurd. A guy from the Annenberg/USC presented here yesterday, and says the way hi surveys are going, it seems that people will save TV for large events like the opening ceremony of the Olympics and other things that people want to see in full view, everything else is fair game to be mobilized and will be increasigly viewed that way. Teenagers are already watching full feature films on iphones willingly and happily. 2008/11/14 Roxanne Darling [EMAIL PROTECTED] We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]jacekartymiak%40gmail.com wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.comsulleleven% 40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv -- Roxanne Darling o ke kai means of the sea in hawaiian Join us at the reef! Mermaid videos, geeks talking, and lots more http://reef.beachwalks.tv 808-384-5554 Video -- http://www.beachwalks.tv Company -- http://www.barefeetstudios.com Twitter-- http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jeffrey Taylor Mobile: +33625497654 Fax: +33177722734 Skype: thejeffreytaylor Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Bid for Placement on YouTube
i tryed to pay mike from blip to put my show in the blip player on the front page, and like he said madd mann you'll never be on the front page i could of been a trend setter On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:30 PM, @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: well said. On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED]rupert%40fatgirlinohio.org wrote: I don't have any more of a problem with this than I do the Sponsored Ads on Google. Like Brook, I filter them out, but a lot of people don't - so Google make billions of dollars of profit from them and from Adsense ads on other sites. As I noted here before, Google's revenue and profit were up a third and a quarter respectively in Q3 2008 largely off the back of these things. You're wrong if you think YouTube popular and featured videos aren't already gamed and bought. It's a stinking den of corruption in there. You should see the kind of bullshit tricks that 'viral' production and advertising companies pull to get their videos featured. This is just making an honest and open auction of it. If I had a client or a video that I think should get top billing for a niche subject, instead of trying to orchestrate some kind of incredibly spammy and unethical view-ramping campaign (and risk getting caught and deleted), I could just buy a sponsored slot. On a site where something like 10 hours of video are being uploaded every minute, that's about as organic and fair a way of buying attention as I can imagine. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Bid for Placement on YouTube
That would surprise me somewhat - you sure you werent deleted for other reasons? Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, liza jean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: we figured this was coming. first two times youtube deleted us it was after we got a million channel views. seemed we were required to upgrade somehow to continue being seen. so, i wonder if my money is good with them. wonder if i am protected from being deleted. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jake Ludington jake@ wrote: I know many of you would be opposed to buying ads to get your content noticed, but what makes this auction process different? You are effectively buying an ad. I know Gary V has purchased google adwords to promote some of his content, depending on his motive buying placement on YouTube might also make sense. If you have a crappy video, no amount of money will get people to watch it. Buying an ad can be the only option for a great video to escape obscurity. As for Brooks' comment re: ignoring ads, someone must click on them because they pay me quite nicely. This will be no different. Some people will ignore promoted videos, some people won't. Jake Ludington http://www.jakeludington.com On Nov 12, 2008 4:44 PM, @sull sulleleven@ wrote: good point. but there must be some value in featured spots. maybe they have some metrics to share. On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Brook Hinton bhinton@ wrote: My eyes automatically... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out on opportunites to take on serialized content that has establushed communities that are alpha-recommending products and services left and right. Networks miss out, content creators miss out, time is wasted, common sense goes by the wayside. Both sides are hurting in their own ways with inprecedented losses and/or difficulty finding revanue. Frustrating to the max, considering it doesn't have to be like this. Being compared to cat pissing on toilet videomakers is ego-related, but it certainly doesn't help the situation to be seen by so-called tastemakers this way. So yeah, they don't owe us anything, but it doesn't make the siutation any less absurd. I really wonder why do you care? If they don't get it, they will have a worthy competitor soon and that's that. May the best show win. The rest is irrelevant. A guy from the Annenberg/USC presented here yesterday, and says the way hi surveys are going, it seems that people will save TV for large events like the opening ceremony of the Olympics and other things that people want to I would say even that is not guaranteed. If you have watched Leo Laporte's 24 Hours with iPhone you have already seen the future. The Olympics will be televised for as long as there will be sponsors who are willing to pay the big bucks to the TV stations, who in turn pay the IOC for the exclusive broadcast rights. As soon as the audience moves on-line, the advertisers will follow and so will IOC. see in full view, everything else is fair game to be mobilized and will be increasigly viewed that way. Teenagers are already watching full feature films on iphones willingly and happily. See? They already know. Funk the networks. Enjoy your freedom. Do you really want those spin masters to understand what we are doing? Do you really want some idiot telling you what you can and cannot say on your show? Do you really miss the gag that the big corporate advertisers are putting on the media? 2008/11/14 Roxanne Darling [EMAIL PROTECTED] We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]jacekartymiak%40gmail.com wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.comsulleleven% 40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv -- Roxanne Darling o ke kai means of the sea in hawaiian Join us at the reef! Mermaid videos, geeks talking, and lots more http://reef.beachwalks.tv 808-384-5554 Video -- http://www.beachwalks.tv Company -- http://www.barefeetstudios.com Twitter-- http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jeffrey Taylor Mobile: +33625497654 Fax: +33177722734 Skype: thejeffreytaylor Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. -Original Message- From: Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:04:07 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out on opportunites to take on serialized content that has establushed communities that are alpha-recommending products and services left and right. Networks miss out, content creators miss out, time is wasted, common sense goes by the wayside. Both sides are hurting in their own ways with inprecedented losses and/or difficulty finding revanue. Frustrating to the max, considering it doesn't have to be like this. Being compared to cat pissing on toilet videomakers is ego-related, but it certainly doesn't help the situation to be seen by so-called tastemakers this way. So yeah, they don't owe us anything, but it doesn't make the siutation any less absurd. I really wonder why do you care? If they don't get it, they will have a worthy competitor soon and that's that. May the best show win. The rest is irrelevant. A guy from the Annenberg/USC presented here yesterday, and says the way hi surveys are going, it seems that people will save TV for large events like the opening ceremony of the Olympics and other things that people want to I would say even that is not guaranteed. If you have watched Leo Laporte's 24 Hours with iPhone you have already seen the future. The Olympics will be televised for as long as there will be sponsors who are willing to pay the big bucks to the TV stations, who in turn pay the IOC for the exclusive broadcast rights. As soon as the audience moves on-line, the advertisers will follow and so will IOC. see in full view, everything else is fair game to be mobilized and will be increasigly viewed that way. Teenagers are already watching full feature films on iphones willingly and happily. See? They already know. Funk the networks. Enjoy your freedom. Do you really want those spin masters to understand what we are doing? Do you really want some idiot telling you what you can and cannot say on your show? Do you really miss the gag that the big corporate advertisers are putting on the media? 2008/11/14 Roxanne Darling [EMAIL PROTECTED] We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]jacekartymiak%40gmail.com wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.comsulleleven% 40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv -- Roxanne Darling o ke kai means of the sea in hawaiian Join us at the reef! Mermaid videos, geeks talking, and lots more http://reef.beachwalks.tv 808-384-5554 Video -- http://www.beachwalks.tv Company -- http://www.barefeetstudios.com Twitter-- http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jeffrey Taylor Mobile: +33625497654 Fax: +33177722734 Skype: thejeffreytaylor Googlechat/Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Bid for Placement on YouTube
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That would surprise me somewhat - you sure you werent deleted for other reasons? Cheers Steve Elbows as we are PG-13 - no nudity, foul language (unless you count puns) or violence - why we get deleted from one single complaint remains a mystery. when it first happened i did a little search for TOS violating vids and found lots of stuff i wish i had never seen that had been up for years. so clearly something else is going on. http://thedaredolldilemmas.blip.tv --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, liza jean daredoll@ wrote: we figured this was coming. first two times youtube deleted us it was after we got a million channel views. seemed we were required to upgrade somehow to continue being seen. so, i wonder if my money is good with them. wonder if i am protected from being deleted. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jake Ludington jake@ wrote: I know many of you would be opposed to buying ads to get your content noticed, but what makes this auction process different? You are effectively buying an ad. I know Gary V has purchased google adwords to promote some of his content, depending on his motive buying placement on YouTube might also make sense. If you have a crappy video, no amount of money will get people to watch it. Buying an ad can be the only option for a great video to escape obscurity. As for Brooks' comment re: ignoring ads, someone must click on them because they pay me quite nicely. This will be no different. Some people will ignore promoted videos, some people won't. Jake Ludington http://www.jakeludington.com On Nov 12, 2008 4:44 PM, @sull sulleleven@ wrote: good point. but there must be some value in featured spots. maybe they have some metrics to share. On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Brook Hinton bhinton@ wrote: My eyes automatically... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Bid for Placement on YouTube
Im not claiming things are done fairly, I simply refute the idea that popularity alone is going to get you kicked off youtube. Its more likely to get you noticed, so if there is something they object to about your content they are more likely to notice and go through with it than if you only had 3 views. And complaints could for a lot, even ungrounded complaints, because they draw your content to someones attention and force them to make a decision. Just because you think you are PG-13 and there's no nudity or foul language, doesnt mean your content is immune from people taking offense. If you suspect your vids are being deleted because they feature simulated asphyxiation, light bondage etc, then you are probably right. Again Im not claiming its fair, in an age where much advertising is designed to trigger 'impure thoughts', where there is a lot more graphic violence on tv, etc, but taboo's remain and so video hosting sites still end up censoring content. Sites which communicate properly with content producers are the best we can hope for, and youtube has always sucked at that. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, liza jean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins steve@ wrote: That would surprise me somewhat - you sure you werent deleted for other reasons? Cheers Steve Elbows as we are PG-13 - no nudity, foul language (unless you count puns) or violence - why we get deleted from one single complaint remains a mystery. when it first happened i did a little search for TOS violating vids and found lots of stuff i wish i had never seen that had been up for years. so clearly something else is going on. http://thedaredolldilemmas.blip.tv --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, liza jean daredoll@ wrote: we figured this was coming. first two times youtube deleted us it was after we got a million channel views. seemed we were required to upgrade somehow to continue being seen. so, i wonder if my money is good with them. wonder if i am protected from being deleted. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jake Ludington jake@ wrote: I know many of you would be opposed to buying ads to get your content noticed, but what makes this auction process different? You are effectively buying an ad. I know Gary V has purchased google adwords to promote some of his content, depending on his motive buying placement on YouTube might also make sense. If you have a crappy video, no amount of money will get people to watch it. Buying an ad can be the only option for a great video to escape obscurity. As for Brooks' comment re: ignoring ads, someone must click on them because they pay me quite nicely. This will be no different. Some people will ignore promoted videos, some people won't. Jake Ludington http://www.jakeludington.com On Nov 12, 2008 4:44 PM, @sull sulleleven@ wrote: good point. but there must be some value in featured spots. maybe they have some metrics to share. On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Brook Hinton bhinton@ wrote: My eyes automatically... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
No doubt that there is truth in the expressed misconceptions of what Independent Net Media encompasses. I dont even know the best terminology these days and language always helps define ( whats a vlog? ;) User Generated Content is NOT EpicFu. So yeah that must be annoying to hear. But I wonder if it is a deliberate misinterpretation in order to make a weak point about where their focus is today. I mean, how can they not know that some UGC uploaded to YouTube (ie. webcam talking head or silly cat videos) with zero production is not in the same category as the episodic productions (aka webisodes) that have fans/audience/community/brand/merch/influence/value/market share etc? They know. They just don't want to add any more value to their own competition... especially if they know that they may end up buying that competition up Why drive up the price? I understand the dire straits involved in being a full-time Internet Entertainment Production Studio or whatever term fits... Starving Artist? I know these past 3 or 4 years have been difficult experimental times for both content creators and startups. With risk and failure comes valuable knowledge. And that's not to say that there have not been many forms of success. Amazing success stories. But it is still early and the landscape has become more unpredictable in the short-term. There is also bad short-sighted or overhyped data being thrown around which doesnt help. I think a crossroads has to be reached if you are in this business. Do you want to (can you?) continue creaitng your own market and controlling your own destiny or do you want to pitch to the big networks to sell your brand and assets and lose control? You know who will be driving the terms of those contracts. Even the best established Indie brands will have to succumb to less than desirable contracts with a high risk of the brand dissolving after a short run (which may or may not be what the big network wants to happen). It's a tough situation. Damned if you do, Damned if you dont. Some may feel exhausted and just want some decent financial exit for all their hard work so that they can move on with new creative projects. And that is fine. I'm just trying to put things in perspective even if its my own unique perspective. And a little devils advocate to keep the conversation going ;) sull On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
Despite being a negative person and setting my expectations rather low, things havent met my expectations. I never believed the hype and silly advertising projections, even without the economic storm I dont think all would be well in the world of web 2.0 also known as 'where's the revenue?' Although I was very harsh on would be 'new media networks' and their associated moguls, I did think they might succeed more than they seem to. I have seen a lot of video's that I thought were great, but not that many series, and the overused magazine format with wacky graphics and very fast cuts has driven me away. But I am aware that I am not usually the target demographic, so who cares about my opinion on that. I am not surprised by big media's lack of interest, because we have not seen success in terms of huge regular audience numbers for indie shows. On that front there are very few web shows that would be of interest to tv networks so far. I did think that niche stuff would gain a lot more traction, but this doesnt seem to have progressed too much either. Video has been incorporated into a lot of sites that are the new version of the 'niche but still mass audience' magazine, eg gaming sites and the financial times. And in terms of publicity and promotion, old media still dominates overall and is now kicking butt on the web, with things like hulu, bbc iplayer, and how many of the top podcasts on itunes are from old media. Whilst some shows have harnessed social networking to great affect, traditional media and viral videos seem to dominate such platforms still, and its really unclear how much longevity specific social network sites have, so much fad. I do not know whether its due to a lack of talent, me being a freak, or simply being overloaded and amused to death, but there isnt a show I watch regularly on the net nor look forward to with any real passion. Not that many tv shows or movies fall into that category for me either. But anyway this means that for the most part, internet video for me means typing in words to youtube to find specific content, much of it originally made by traditonal media. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, @... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No doubt that there is truth in the expressed misconceptions of what Independent Net Media encompasses. I dont even know the best terminology these days and language always helps define ( whats a vlog? ;) User Generated Content is NOT EpicFu. So yeah that must be annoying to hear. But I wonder if it is a deliberate misinterpretation in order to make a weak point about where their focus is today. I mean, how can they not know that some UGC uploaded to YouTube (ie. webcam talking head or silly cat videos) with zero production is not in the same category as the episodic productions (aka webisodes) that have fans/audience/community/brand/merch/influence/value/market share etc? They know. They just don't want to add any more value to their own competition... especially if they know that they may end up buying that competition up Why drive up the price? I understand the dire straits involved in being a full-time Internet Entertainment Production Studio or whatever term fits... Starving Artist? I know these past 3 or 4 years have been difficult experimental times for both content creators and startups. With risk and failure comes valuable knowledge. And that's not to say that there have not been many forms of success. Amazing success stories. But it is still early and the landscape has become more unpredictable in the short-term. There is also bad short-sighted or overhyped data being thrown around which doesnt help. I think a crossroads has to be reached if you are in this business. Do you want to (can you?) continue creaitng your own market and controlling your own destiny or do you want to pitch to the big networks to sell your brand and assets and lose control? You know who will be driving the terms of those contracts. Even the best established Indie brands will have to succumb to less than desirable contracts with a high risk of the brand dissolving after a short run (which may or may not be what the big network wants to happen). It's a tough situation. Damned if you do, Damned if you dont. Some may feel exhausted and just want some decent financial exit for all their hard work so that they can move on with new creative projects. And that is fine. I'm just trying to put things in perspective even if its my own unique perspective. And a little devils advocate to keep the conversation going ;) sull On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:09 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
I know. The money thing. It's a big problem, when you don't have it and I don't want to trivialize it, as I personally know how it feels when you don't have it and can't tell when it will be coming. In times like these you need to scale down and work within the limitations of the format. I had to do it several times in recent years, it is possible. For example, when I started the first audio podcast in Poland in 2005, I though I could imitate Adam Curry. It just wasn't possible. I gave up on free stuff and decided to develop a line of commercial training videos. Which is not as glamorous as signing a seven-figure deal with a major network, but it offers me a piece of mind and flexible working hours. It counts when you have a small child and a debilitating disease that strikes at you when you least expect it several times a year. I wouldn't count on networks funding the independent producers. Unfortunately, it looks like the money's drying out and the independents have little chance to get a piece of it. On the other hand, we've already seen some major deals so I'm bullish on on-line video. But to see more money pumped into on-line video production and distribution we have to wait for another bubble, just like the Web 2.0 guys now have to make friends with e-commerce and build some useful stuff, it is time for the indies to do the work that pays they bills while working on their portfolios on a side. I think the next bubble will make a lot of new media content producers rich and famous, we just have to be patient. I understand you very well when you write that you are angry when the major networks' bosses laugh at what you strongly believe in, but in times like these it's worth to remember what Ghandi used to say: First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win They can no longer ignore us, so they laugh at us. Next, they will fight us, then we'll win. It's only a matter of time. When I started writing computer books, people used to tell me I was an idiot: how a Polish guy living in Lublin, Poland (check in on Google Maps) could possibly write a computer book in English, publish it in the USA, and make money? Guess what? That's what I did with StarOffice for Linux Bible published in 2000 by IDG. Not bad. When I wrote in 1998 a long article on the future of print on demand (POD), people told me again I was an idiot. In 2003 I started a small POD business, again all while living in Poland. I'm selling my work on all international Amazon.com sites, Barnes Noble, and many other on-line stores. This year I'm launching an on-line training business and people are telling me I'm an idiot again! :) Why am I telling you all of this? To show you that you should be doing your own thing, build your audience, and the guys with the money will find you. That is what I did. I started writing articles and speaking at local conferences. I was writing for the local computer press, local edition of Playboy, newspapers, etc. Then I started writing computer books for the US publishers, then, once I found out that the money was in publishing, not in writing books, I decided to write and self-publish my own books. All of that has led to very nice training contracts with Fortune 200 companies. Sure, I am not a world-famous writer and I don't have blond long-legged groupies trying to rip my pants off and sell it on eBay, but life is still not that bad. Just do your own stuff, retain all rights if possible, don't be shy about doing something for money, you may actually learn something. And, above all, listen to your audience. My audience told me to continue writing articles after I wrote my first one. Which I did. Then they told me to write and self-publish a book on the same subject. Which I did. Then, they asked me to do training, in-person and on-line. I am not going to say 'no.' Don't worry about the money. Worry about the free or nearly-free distribution channels disappearing. This is how the major networks may try to fight us, by closing those down, but they will not win. There are far too may bright coders with too much free time on their hands to let that happen. And don't get angry at networks' bosses stupidity. You don't want a wise competitor with boatloads of cash. You *want* your competition to be stupid. Jacek On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:09 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. -Original Message- From: Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:04:07 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out
[videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
Wont investors see it as experimental and very high risk unlss there are more examples of people getting a return on their investment? Maybe I am missing some success stories, where are they? Doesnt help that the handful of early stars seem to have failed to capitalize on their position. What Ive found most annoying is the halfhearted way that those who have received some backing, have been treated. We've seen several shows get picked up by new media networks who then seem to have no clue what to do with them, and eventually bail out. Either they have little idea what they are doing, or the shows themselves dont have the potential that was thought, maybe both. The fixation on the advertising model hasnt helped. I would have paid a subscription to watch Rocketboom back in the day, though probably not now as my interest wained. I do pay a monthly subscription for a podcast, $9.99 whch gets me about 4 hours of audio a week that fills my walks to work. Theres actually probably more like 20 hours a week of material but I just pick what I want. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. -Original Message- From: Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:04:07 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out on opportunites to take on serialized content that has establushed communities that are alpha-recommending products and services left and right. Networks miss out, content creators miss out, time is wasted, common sense goes by the wayside. Both sides are hurting in their own ways with inprecedented losses and/or difficulty finding revanue. Frustrating to the max, considering it doesn't have to be like this. Being compared to cat pissing on toilet videomakers is ego-related, but it certainly doesn't help the situation to be seen by so-called tastemakers this way. So yeah, they don't owe us anything, but it doesn't make the siutation any less absurd. I really wonder why do you care? If they don't get it, they will have a worthy competitor soon and that's that. May the best show win. The rest is irrelevant. A guy from the Annenberg/USC presented here yesterday, and says the way hi surveys are going, it seems that people will save TV for large events like the opening ceremony of the Olympics and other things that people want to I would say even that is not guaranteed. If you have watched Leo Laporte's 24 Hours with iPhone you have already seen the future. The Olympics will be televised for as long as there will be sponsors who are willing to pay the big bucks to the TV stations, who in turn pay the IOC for the exclusive broadcast rights. As soon as the audience moves on-line, the advertisers will follow and so will IOC. see in full view, everything else is fair game to be mobilized and will be increasigly viewed that way. Teenagers are already watching full feature films on iphones willingly and happily. See? They already know. Funk the networks. Enjoy your freedom. Do you really want those spin masters to understand what we are doing? Do you really want some idiot telling you what you can and cannot say on your show? Do you really miss the gag that the big corporate advertisers are putting on the media? 2008/11/14 Roxanne Darling [EMAIL PROTECTED] We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]jacekartymiak%40gmail.com wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.comsulleleven% 40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed. http://www.devguide.net/books/vitips1 devGuide.tv http://devguide.tv -- Roxanne Darling o ke kai
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What Ive found most annoying is the halfhearted way that those who have received some backing, have been treated. We've seen several shows get picked up by new media networks who then seem to have no clue what to do with them, and eventually bail out. Either they have little idea what they are doing, or the shows themselves dont have the potential that was thought, maybe both. I think this situation is actually quite simple to explain. The shows that had a lot of followers on the Internet did not bring their audience with them over to the TV networks. At the same time, the TV networks' audience did not know anything about those new bright things. The next time a TV network does a deal with a show distributed on the Internet, they have to do three things at the same time: a) heavily invest in growing the internet-based audience, b) heavily invest in promotion of the new shows on their networks, do Jay Leno, Larry King, Howard Stern, David Letterman, the whole kaboodle c) publish the shows both on-line and on the TV networks at the same time, simultaneously. Or, in other words, make them stars, not cheap labour. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really enjoy saying all the thing you do as well, Jacek. The problem is that it's time the funding sources of all types stop seeing this as experimental and something for later. The goods are there NOW. -Original Message- From: Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:04:07 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Traditional Media Scares the Shi* out of me As I Type On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Jeffrey Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They don't have an obligation to independents at all, but they're being massively stupid for missing out on opportunites to take on serialized content that has establushed communities that are alpha-recommending products and services left and right. Networks miss out, content creators miss out, time is wasted, common sense goes by the wayside. Both sides are hurting in their own ways with inprecedented losses and/or difficulty finding revanue. Frustrating to the max, considering it doesn't have to be like this. Being compared to cat pissing on toilet videomakers is ego-related, but it certainly doesn't help the situation to be seen by so-called tastemakers this way. So yeah, they don't owe us anything, but it doesn't make the siutation any less absurd. I really wonder why do you care? If they don't get it, they will have a worthy competitor soon and that's that. May the best show win. The rest is irrelevant. A guy from the Annenberg/USC presented here yesterday, and says the way hi surveys are going, it seems that people will save TV for large events like the opening ceremony of the Olympics and other things that people want to I would say even that is not guaranteed. If you have watched Leo Laporte's 24 Hours with iPhone you have already seen the future. The Olympics will be televised for as long as there will be sponsors who are willing to pay the big bucks to the TV stations, who in turn pay the IOC for the exclusive broadcast rights. As soon as the audience moves on-line, the advertisers will follow and so will IOC. see in full view, everything else is fair game to be mobilized and will be increasigly viewed that way. Teenagers are already watching full feature films on iphones willingly and happily. See? They already know. Funk the networks. Enjoy your freedom. Do you really want those spin masters to understand what we are doing? Do you really want some idiot telling you what you can and cannot say on your show? Do you really miss the gag that the big corporate advertisers are putting on the media? 2008/11/14 Roxanne Darling [EMAIL PROTECTED] We, what time are you meeting??? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Jacek Artymiak [EMAIL PROTECTED]jacekartymiak%40gmail.com wrote: But who says the networks have any obligation to hire the independents? On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 8:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com thejeffreytaylor%40gmail.com wrote: Because people who deserve to be paid well for their excellent work are not getting their due. That is all. -Original Message- From: @sull [EMAIL PROTECTED] sulleleven%40gmail.comsulleleven% 40gmail.com snip Why do they NEED TO GET IT? Why do we feel like we NEED THEM TO GET IT? Co-Existing not feasible? Is this about getting picked up by the old suits or is this about Independents being able to leverage technology to publish their works and fins a market? -- Jacek Artymiak http://devGuide.net vi(1) Tips: Essential vi/vim Editor Skills, 1st ed.
[videoblogging] Web Hosting
Hostgator blows. I need a new web host for my blog. I'm sick of trying to get into my blog and always running into a problem. What's a good host that some of you use?
Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:11 PM, bmilam52 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hostgator blows. I need a new web host for my blog. I'm sick of trying to get into my blog and always running into a problem. What's a good host that some of you use? I use seekdotnet.com. It isn't perfect -- no host is, but so far, of all the ones I have tried over the years. this one has been the best. Lil
Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting
I've asked around on Twitter about this. A lot of people use and like Dreamhost, and they have various nice things like automatic Wordpress installation. If you need a bit more, people seem to like MediaTemple. If you want to go green - in light of the data-centers-polluting-more- than-airlines-by-2020 thing - Dreamhost offset their power use with carbon credits. For properly green hosting, AISO.net is the biggest solar powered host, I think, based in California. When my payment period is up with my current host, I'm moving to http:// solarenergyhost.com which is a solar hydro powered host using AISO's servers but based in Vancouver. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv/ On 14-Nov-08, at 11:24 AM, Lil Peck wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:11 PM, bmilam52 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hostgator blows. I need a new web host for my blog. I'm sick of trying to get into my blog and always running into a problem. What's a good host that some of you use? I use seekdotnet.com. It isn't perfect -- no host is, but so far, of all the ones I have tried over the years. this one has been the best. Lil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting
For my rich clients I use Rackspace. The best of the best. For my poor clients I always use steadfast.net. Cheap n cheerful.. Reliable so far, surprisingly good customer service. -- David Terranova www.davidterranova.com | blog.davidterranova.com | www.rebelrave.tv From: bmilam52 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:11:27 - To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: [videoblogging] Web Hosting Hostgator blows. I need a new web host for my blog. I'm sick of trying to get into my blog and always running into a problem. What's a good host that some of you use? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting
Oh yeah, I¹ve got some sites on mediatemple, but they all seem to have bandwidth problems (even though each site has a lot of dedicated bandwidth) and connection errors. -- David Terranova www.davidterranova.com | blog.davidterranova.com | www.rebelrave.tv From: Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:33:38 -0800 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting I've asked around on Twitter about this. A lot of people use and like Dreamhost, and they have various nice things like automatic Wordpress installation. If you need a bit more, people seem to like MediaTemple. If you want to go green - in light of the data-centers-polluting-more- than-airlines-by-2020 thing - Dreamhost offset their power use with carbon credits. For properly green hosting, AISO.net is the biggest solar powered host, I think, based in California. When my payment period is up with my current host, I'm moving to http:// solarenergyhost.com which is a solar hydro powered host using AISO's servers but based in Vancouver. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv/ On 14-Nov-08, at 11:24 AM, Lil Peck wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:11 PM, bmilam52 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:bcnvmilam%40live.com wrote: Hostgator blows. I need a new web host for my blog. I'm sick of trying to get into my blog and always running into a problem. What's a good host that some of you use? I use seekdotnet.com. It isn't perfect -- no host is, but so far, of all the ones I have tried over the years. this one has been the best. Lil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting
Though no host is perfect, I use Laughing Squid because I know him and he helps fund local (san francisco) arts functions with the money. And if you just an easy WP install for your videoblog, the Artist Discount is pretty good: http://laughingsquid.net/ Schlomo Rabinowitz http://schlomo.tv - finally moving to wordpress http://hatfactory.net - relaxed coworking AIM:schlomochat On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 11:39 AM, David Terranova [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Oh yeah, I¹ve got some sites on mediatemple, but they all seem to have bandwidth problems (even though each site has a lot of dedicated bandwidth) and connection errors. -- David Terranova www.davidterranova.com | blog.davidterranova.com | www.rebelrave.tv From: Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] rupert%40fatgirlinohio.org Reply-To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:33:38 -0800 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting I've asked around on Twitter about this. A lot of people use and like Dreamhost, and they have various nice things like automatic Wordpress installation. If you need a bit more, people seem to like MediaTemple. If you want to go green - in light of the data-centers-polluting-more- than-airlines-by-2020 thing - Dreamhost offset their power use with carbon credits. For properly green hosting, AISO.net is the biggest solar powered host, I think, based in California. When my payment period is up with my current host, I'm moving to http:// solarenergyhost.com which is a solar hydro powered host using AISO's servers but based in Vancouver. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv/ On 14-Nov-08, at 11:24 AM, Lil Peck wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:11 PM, bmilam52 [EMAIL PROTECTED]bcnvmilam%40live.com mailto:bcnvmilam%40live.com bcnvmilam%2540live.com wrote: Hostgator blows. I need a new web host for my blog. I'm sick of trying to get into my blog and always running into a problem. What's a good host that some of you use? I use seekdotnet.com. It isn't perfect -- no host is, but so far, of all the ones I have tried over the years. this one has been the best. Lil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Recording Live audio from different locations
OK, I've been searching high and low for a low-cost solution to this that doesn't involve using phone lines. Essentially it boils down to this: I live in LA. My co-host lives in Seattle. We'd like to record a live conversation with similar quality between our voices, meaning I don't want my voice sounding great and her voice sounding like a telephone. The video portion will utilize voice-over while our content plays beneath. We may also use animation or puppets along with our voices. Anyway, you can see that it would be less than ideal to have the voices at different qualities. Are there any tools for recording two audio streams live from two separate locations that don't involve thousands of dollars of audio equipment? Thanks folks! Dom Zook www.gadzookfilms.com
[videoblogging] How to embed hi-res Youtube videos
Rupert made this cool hack to embed the hi-res version of Youtube videos: http://www.twittervlog.tv/high-quality-youtube-embed-generator.html This guy has a post with some more detailed i fo about the process here: http://blog.jimmyr.com/High_Quality_on_Youtube_11_2008.php Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790
Re: [videoblogging] Recording Live audio from different locations
In podcasting, this is a technique referred to as a double ender http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-ender WhatTheCast, my audio podcast, is recorded as a multi ender (same idea, but four hosts). We do a conference call via Skype, and each host sends me their end of the conversation as a WAV file.I synch them and edit them so it sounds like we're all on at the same time. Each host uses a good quality mic and records at 44.1KHz 16-bit, so the end product sounds great. On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Dom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, I've been searching high and low for a low-cost solution to this that doesn't involve using phone lines. Essentially it boils down to this: I live in LA. My co-host lives in Seattle. We'd like to record a live conversation with similar quality between our voices, meaning I don't want my voice sounding great and her voice sounding like a telephone. The video portion will utilize voice-over while our content plays beneath. We may also use animation or puppets along with our voices. Anyway, you can see that it would be less than ideal to have the voices at different qualities. Are there any tools for recording two audio streams live from two separate locations that don't involve thousands of dollars of audio equipment? Thanks folks! Dom Zook www.gadzookfilms.com Yahoo! Groups Links -- Brian Richardson - http://siliconchef.com - http://dragoncontv.com - http://whatthecast.com - http://www.3chip.com
Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting
I'm gonna just use Netrillium -- one of my fav blogs uses them. Plus they have a 2.99 plan. I just wanna get back up. Matthew Milam http://blogcritics.org/writer/matthew_milam -- My Blogcritics Writings http://mmilam.newsvine.com -- My Newsvine Column http://bmilam.com -- Main Blog http://vlog.bmilam.com -- Video Blog http://podcast.bmilam.com -- Podcast http://mmilam.bmilam.com -- Personal From: schlomo rabinowitz Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 2:16 PM To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting Though no host is perfect, I use Laughing Squid because I know him and he helps fund local (san francisco) arts functions with the money. And if you just an easy WP install for your videoblog, the Artist Discount is pretty good: http://laughingsquid.net/ Schlomo Rabinowitz http://schlomo.tv - finally moving to wordpress http://hatfactory.net - relaxed coworking AIM:schlomochat On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 11:39 AM, David Terranova [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Oh yeah, I¹ve got some sites on mediatemple, but they all seem to have bandwidth problems (even though each site has a lot of dedicated bandwidth) and connection errors. -- David Terranova www.davidterranova.com | blog.davidterranova.com | www.rebelrave.tv From: Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] rupert%40fatgirlinohio.org Reply-To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:33:38 -0800 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting I've asked around on Twitter about this. A lot of people use and like Dreamhost, and they have various nice things like automatic Wordpress installation. If you need a bit more, people seem to like MediaTemple. If you want to go green - in light of the data-centers-polluting-more- than-airlines-by-2020 thing - Dreamhost offset their power use with carbon credits. For properly green hosting, AISO.net is the biggest solar powered host, I think, based in California. When my payment period is up with my current host, I'm moving to http:// solarenergyhost.com which is a solar hydro powered host using AISO's servers but based in Vancouver. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv/ On 14-Nov-08, at 11:24 AM, Lil Peck wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:11 PM, bmilam52 [EMAIL PROTECTED]bcnvmilam%40live.com mailto:bcnvmilam%40live.com bcnvmilam%2540live.com wrote: Hostgator blows. I need a new web host for my blog. I'm sick of trying to get into my blog and always running into a problem. What's a good host that some of you use? I use seekdotnet.com. It isn't perfect -- no host is, but so far, of all the ones I have tried over the years. this one has been the best. Lil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] NYT blog bit: Internet Video in Korea Eclipses the DVD
November 14, 2008, 2:36 pm Internet Video in Korea Eclipses the DVD By Saul Hansell http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/14/for-warner-internet-video-in-korea-eclipses-dvd/?hp
Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting
dreamhost, reasonably reliable, cheap, have a green policy and also host NGO content for free. On 15/11/2008, at 6:11 AM, bmilam52 wrote: I need a new web host for my blog. I'm sick of trying to get into my blog and always running into a problem. What's a good host that some of you use? cheers Adrian Miles [EMAIL PROTECTED] bachelor communication honours coordinator vogmae.net.au
Re: [videoblogging] Recording Live audio from different locations
- Original Message - From: Dom (snip) The video portion will utilize voice-over while our content plays beneath. We may also use animation or puppets along with our voices. Anyway, you can see that it would be less than ideal to have the voices at different qualities. Are there any tools for recording two audio streams live from two separate locations that don't involve thousands of dollars of audio equipment? Thanks folks! As suggested a double ender will work just fine. How low cost it is depends on what your definition of cost is. You will need quality recorders. A pair of Zoom H-2s will work great. Do not use anything like a digital voice recorder from Olympus or Sony. I'm not sure about the video aspect of this. Will you both need to see the video to comment on it? I would think that this may be a problem. You both need to see the same thing at the same time. Richard Amirault Boston, MA, USA http://n1jdu.org http://bostonfandom.org http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7hf9u2ZdlQ
[videoblogging] Re: Recording Live audio from different locations
You're right, I should specify my idea of cost. I'm thinking a decent mic on both ends (some cardioid condenser) run through an amp of some sort into the computer. Preferably under $150 for the set (so $300 total for me and my co-host) though I've seen a wide variance with regard to price and capability and preference. :) I already have a nice Shure SM57, with a decent amp. But that mic isn't cheap so I'm hoping there's something my co-host might be able to use that would suffice for all but the most discerning ears. As for watching video at the same time, Apple has a nifty feature in iChat that allows two users on their Leopard operating system view things simultaneously. I have yet to test whether that would function along with a Skype set-up though. Still, our podcast is not dependent on watching anything at the time of the recording. The actual video will be created after the audio at this time. Unless I see a system that works better, of course. Thanks for all the suggestions, they're great! Dom http://www.gadzookfilms.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Richard Amirault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Dom (snip) The video portion will utilize voice-over while our content plays beneath. We may also use animation or puppets along with our voices. Anyway, you can see that it would be less than ideal to have the voices at different qualities. Are there any tools for recording two audio streams live from two separate locations that don't involve thousands of dollars of audio equipment? Thanks folks! As suggested a double ender will work just fine. How low cost it is depends on what your definition of cost is. You will need quality recorders. A pair of Zoom H-2s will work great. Do not use anything like a digital voice recorder from Olympus or Sony. I'm not sure about the video aspect of this. Will you both need to see the video to comment on it? I would think that this may be a problem. You both need to see the same thing at the same time. Richard Amirault Boston, MA, USA http://n1jdu.org http://bostonfandom.org http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7hf9u2ZdlQ
[videoblogging] Re: Recording Live audio from different locations
Whoops, meant to say I have a Shure SM7B, not a SM57. Yikes... can I go home yet? Dom http://www.gadzookfilms.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Dom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're right, I should specify my idea of cost. I'm thinking a decent mic on both ends (some cardioid condenser) run through an amp of some sort into the computer. Preferably under $150 for the set (so $300 total for me and my co-host) though I've seen a wide variance with regard to price and capability and preference. :) I already have a nice Shure SM57, with a decent amp. But that mic isn't cheap so I'm hoping there's something my co-host might be able to use that would suffice for all but the most discerning ears. As for watching video at the same time, Apple has a nifty feature in iChat that allows two users on their Leopard operating system view things simultaneously. I have yet to test whether that would function along with a Skype set-up though. Still, our podcast is not dependent on watching anything at the time of the recording. The actual video will be created after the audio at this time. Unless I see a system that works better, of course. Thanks for all the suggestions, they're great! Dom http://www.gadzookfilms.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Richard Amirault ramirault@ wrote: - Original Message - From: Dom (snip) The video portion will utilize voice-over while our content plays beneath. We may also use animation or puppets along with our voices. Anyway, you can see that it would be less than ideal to have the voices at different qualities. Are there any tools for recording two audio streams live from two separate locations that don't involve thousands of dollars of audio equipment? Thanks folks! As suggested a double ender will work just fine. How low cost it is depends on what your definition of cost is. You will need quality recorders. A pair of Zoom H-2s will work great. Do not use anything like a digital voice recorder from Olympus or Sony. I'm not sure about the video aspect of this. Will you both need to see the video to comment on it? I would think that this may be a problem. You both need to see the same thing at the same time. Richard Amirault Boston, MA, USA http://n1jdu.org http://bostonfandom.org http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7hf9u2ZdlQ
[videoblogging] Re: Bid for Placement on YouTube
popularity with not a single extra cent going to youtube is one hypothesis about our deletion dilemma, but i think someone is hugely angry that we routinely expose the fact that spandex is not actually a protective layer. the idea that it is is planted early and often in children's television, and children are simply unaware that our material is not just for them. my six year old niece loves our work, but wonders why our heroines don't try harder to avoid the traps. if i can just influence a few thousand 6 year old girls to be on the lookout for such traps it will be a good thing. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Im not claiming things are done fairly, I simply refute the idea that popularity alone is going to get you kicked off youtube. Its more likely to get you noticed, so if there is something they object to about your content they are more likely to notice and go through with it than if you only had 3 views. And complaints could for a lot, even ungrounded complaints, because they draw your content to someones attention and force them to make a decision. Just because you think you are PG-13 and there's no nudity or foul language, doesnt mean your content is immune from people taking offense. If you suspect your vids are being deleted because they feature simulated asphyxiation, light bondage etc, then you are probably right. Again Im not claiming its fair, in an age where much advertising is designed to trigger 'impure thoughts', where there is a lot more graphic violence on tv, etc, but taboo's remain and so video hosting sites still end up censoring content. Sites which communicate properly with content producers are the best we can hope for, and youtube has always sucked at that. Cheers Steve Elbows --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, liza jean daredoll@ wrote: --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Steve Watkins steve@ wrote: That would surprise me somewhat - you sure you werent deleted for other reasons? Cheers Steve Elbows as we are PG-13 - no nudity, foul language (unless you count puns) or violence - why we get deleted from one single complaint remains a mystery. when it first happened i did a little search for TOS violating vids and found lots of stuff i wish i had never seen that had been up for years. so clearly something else is going on. http://thedaredolldilemmas.blip.tv --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, liza jean daredoll@ wrote: we figured this was coming. first two times youtube deleted us it was after we got a million channel views. seemed we were required to upgrade somehow to continue being seen. so, i wonder if my money is good with them. wonder if i am protected from being deleted. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Jake Ludington jake@ wrote: I know many of you would be opposed to buying ads to get your content noticed, but what makes this auction process different? You are effectively buying an ad. I know Gary V has purchased google adwords to promote some of his content, depending on his motive buying placement on YouTube might also make sense. If you have a crappy video, no amount of money will get people to watch it. Buying an ad can be the only option for a great video to escape obscurity. As for Brooks' comment re: ignoring ads, someone must click on them because they pay me quite nicely. This will be no different. Some people will ignore promoted videos, some people won't. Jake Ludington http://www.jakeludington.com On Nov 12, 2008 4:44 PM, @sull sulleleven@ wrote: good point. but there must be some value in featured spots. maybe they have some metrics to share. On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Brook Hinton bhinton@ wrote: My eyes automatically... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting
Am quite happy with Dreamhost. Ruud Elmendorp Video Journalist Africa http://www.videoreporter.nl On 11/14/08, David Terranova [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh yeah, I¹ve got some sites on mediatemple, but they all seem to have bandwidth problems (even though each site has a lot of dedicated bandwidth) and connection errors. -- David Terranova www.davidterranova.com | blog.davidterranova.com | www.rebelrave.tv From: Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:33:38 -0800 To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Web Hosting I've asked around on Twitter about this. A lot of people use and like Dreamhost, and they have various nice things like automatic Wordpress installation. If you need a bit more, people seem to like MediaTemple. If you want to go green - in light of the data-centers-polluting-more- than-airlines-by-2020 thing - Dreamhost offset their power use with carbon credits. For properly green hosting, AISO.net is the biggest solar powered host, I think, based in California. When my payment period is up with my current host, I'm moving to http:// solarenergyhost.com which is a solar hydro powered host using AISO's servers but based in Vancouver. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv/ On 14-Nov-08, at 11:24 AM, Lil Peck wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:11 PM, bmilam52 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:bcnvmilam%40live.com wrote: Hostgator blows. I need a new web host for my blog. I'm sick of trying to get into my blog and always running into a problem. What's a good host that some of you use? I use seekdotnet.com. It isn't perfect -- no host is, but so far, of all the ones I have tried over the years. this one has been the best. Lil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
