Hi Dave, What $400 cam did you buy? Curious that's all.
Tom On Feb 9, 2010, at 11:49 PM, David Jones wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:19 PM, [email protected] > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Call me old school, but I still publish my vlog in 320x240. For a > couple of reasons. My old Flip shoots at 640x480 and at the native > size its pretty crummy. Scaled to quarter screen it tightens up and > cleans up the noise considerably. > > > > Also theres nothing in my vlog that needs to be seen at HD > resolution. Waste of bandwidth. > > If you follow that logic to its logical conclusion, then why have a > video blog at all?, why not just an audio podcast? > Or at least why not 160x120 for even more bandwidth saving and speed? > > A video blog should be all about the video (ok audio is super > important too, but beside the point), the bigger and more glorious the > source material the better. Try watching 320x240 full screen... > I know people who watch my video blog like a TV show and put it on > full screen while having their breakfast etc. > > The beauty of modern hosts like YouTube are that it offers whatever > resolution the user desires. Defaults to 360p to save bandwidth, but > offers selectable 480p, 720p, or higher for those who chose it. > I now always shoot and upload in 1280x720 because: > a) I have the camera that can do it > b) People have different needs (and bandwidth isn't an issue for > probably the majority of people these days) > c) And you never know what the future holds. I didn't want to look > back in a few years and wish I had shot those previous hundred > episodes in HD for whatever reason. > > Any video blogger who is filming and/or uploading in 320x240 only is > doing their effort a real disservice I think. > My $400 HD cam was the best money I ever spent. > > Dave. > > Tom Dolan [email protected] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
