On Jan 31, 2008 10:01 PM, Adrian Miles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 01/02/2008, at 4:28 AM, Jay dedman wrote: > > > I think the biggest challenge is getting creators to actually make > > video comments. > > Youtube has the only video commenting system Ive really seen used. > > Most times though, people are just linking to their own videos so they > > can ride out the popularity of someone else's video. > > Youtube is the the city wall where everyone wheatpastes their flyers. > > I know some here are unfamiliar with my short tempered rants on this > particular subject, but Jay is 100% on the money. The web works by its > porousness and permeability. Small bits and the rest of it. Video > still flies in the face of this. Sorry for dot points, I'm supposed to > be working for my employer at the moment....
You have short tempered rants on this subject!? Sudden realization that I have obviously missed something really good. Where are those at? time to pull out gmail and mine my 50,000 email history. > 1. why can't I use QT plugin to copy and paste a part of your video > into my QT player? (just as I can copy text straight out of a web > browser). cool... I totally feel you here... you can at least download a qt video, open it in qt and then do this... but this PALES in comparison to the hurdles with f*cking flash video. > 2. why treat video as little closed media objects online? we could right a book on this subject, I feel it would be more productive for me to mine for your past comments... are they on here or on one of your blogs. > 3. for example if you have a credit sequence, but I quote the middle > of your video, what point is your credit sequence? Are you farmilliar with the Ted Nelson Exanadu project and it's MANY MANY ill fated inspired projects? It's truely fascinating. A sort of wikipedia for media concept. EVERYTHING is interefernceable. A sort of mythic beast / grail quest project with a slippery slope. > 4. we do this with text every day. just look at what my email client > has done with Jay's email as an everyday matter of course: quoted it, > changed it tyopographically to indicate this, and let me add to it. It > retains his name, and clearly indicates that some of the text here > comes from somewhere else. I still haven't seen much that does this > for video. Yes, deinitely the same wavelength. Again.. I point to the history of photo for parrells since the image is much further along in the process of democratization by the masses then video. > 5. blogs solved all of this for online writing with permalinks, a post > structure, trackback. And this should be the starting point which vlogging builds upon. > I don't think much of comments. They seem old skool to me. I know I > love to get 'em, but that's just vanity. Check > Comments are aggregating > others views to my own identity, I much prefer people to write > something in their blog and link to me - so I rate trackbacks way > above comments (which is why every now and then over 8 years I've had > comments on, comments off, etc). Completely agree... andreas is the exact same way... so much so there's no comments on his solitude.dk > So while video comments are > interesting, I think a much more interesting (and harder thing) to do > would be to quote some of your video in my video and for your video or > video blog post, to know about this (video trackback) so it is as > much of an almost palimpsest (wrong word but suggestive) as a good > blog with its quotes, links out, links in, etc... I'll have to read up on your word to get your meaning... But I disagree that when we talk about video commenting we're ONLY talking about putting videos into comments on people's blogs... I would suggest we instead include vlog to vlog comments in this general discussion of "video commenting"... and drag it out into the open. > cheers > Adrian Miles > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > bachelor communication honours coordinator > vogmae.net.au > Cheers, -Mike mmeiser.com/blog > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
