I'd love your take on the best cheap Mini HD camcorder.

Here are the contenders as far as I can tell (please add on your fave if you
prefer it over these)

- Flip Ultra HD
- Flip Mino HD
- Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10
- Kodak Zi6

I admit I like the pistol grip form factor of the Xacti and prefer both the
Kodak/Xacti because you can use your own memory card. BUT, I've watched videos'
on Vimeo where the Flips having better video quality and low light performance.
What about sound quality? The Flip's seem to do poorly in this area?

Thanks

Julian

LOL. Bill - you know that's exactly what I've been tossing and turning about! I
know I need/want the 30fps mobile video of the iPhone 3GS but I love the idea of
HD from watching all that pretty footage on Vimeo. I'd like to do both but the
misses would have my head! :-)

Julian

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Julian Seery Gude" <julian@...> wrote:
>
> I'd love your take on the best cheap Mini HD camcorder.
>
> Here are the contenders as far as I can tell (please add on your fave if you
prefer it over these)
>
> - Flip Ultra HD
> - Flip Mino HD
> - Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10
> - Kodak Zi6
>
> I admit I like the pistol grip form factor of the Xacti and prefer both the
Kodak/Xacti because you can use your own memory card. BUT, I've watched videos'
on Vimeo where the Flips having better video quality and low light performance.
What about sound quality? The Flip's seem to do poorly in this area?
>
> Thanks
>
> Julian
>

I'm surprised we're over a week out and people haven't brought back their
takes to the list, but Lauren G. just put up a blog post with her take:

http://laurengalanter.com/2009/06/30/open-video-round-up/

What did the other attendees think about the Conference, and what is there
to tell people beyond the <video> tag and OGG Theora? I'll chime in later,
but I just wanted start the conversation.

--
Jeffrey Taylor
912 Cole St, #349
San Francisco, CA  94117
USA
Mobile: +14157281264
Fax: +33177722734
http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor
http://organicconversations.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Friend has a Flip Ultra HD, and it does a LOT better in low light than my Cannon
HF-100.

As for sound it seems ok, but he mainly puts it in situations where the volume
is a bit too much:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChBKTVYB0kY

(achem, me on bass)

Jarod the seldom poster.



--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Julian Seery Gude" <julian@...> wrote:
>
> I'd love your take on the best cheap Mini HD camcorder.
>
> Here are the contenders as far as I can tell (please add on your fave if you
prefer it over these)
>
> - Flip Ultra HD
> - Flip Mino HD
> - Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10
> - Kodak Zi6
>
> I admit I like the pistol grip form factor of the Xacti and prefer both the
Kodak/Xacti because you can use your own memory card. BUT, I've watched videos'
on Vimeo where the Flips having better video quality and low light performance.
What about sound quality? The Flip's seem to do poorly in this area?
>
> Thanks
>
> Julian
>

Mark my words... iPhoneHD.

iPhone 3GS video chipset already handles 720p, so it's a matter of time :P


Kevin Lim
Cyberculturalist
http://theory.isthereason.com
This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ] private
email locator: ╔╗╔═╦╗ ║╚╣║║╚╗ ╚═╩═╩═╝



On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Julian Seery Gude<julian@...> wrote:
>
>
> LOL. Bill - you know that's exactly what I've been tossing and turning
> about! I know I need/want the 30fps mobile video of the iPhone 3GS but I
> love the idea of HD from watching all that pretty footage on Vimeo. I'd like
> to do both but the misses would have my head! :-)
>
> Julian
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Julian Seery Gude" <julian@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> I'd love your take on the best cheap Mini HD camcorder.
>>
>> Here are the contenders as far as I can tell (please add on your fave if
>> you prefer it over these)
>>
>> - Flip Ultra HD
>> - Flip Mino HD
>> - Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10
>> - Kodak Zi6
>>
>> I admit I like the pistol grip form factor of the Xacti and prefer both
>> the Kodak/Xacti because you can use your own memory card. BUT, I've watched
>> videos' on Vimeo where the Flips having better video quality and low light
>> performance. What about sound quality? The Flip's seem to do poorly in this
>> area?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Julian
>>
>
>

Hey Jarod,

Great example - I think the video looks and sounds pretty good for a
live performance. But screw video, let's talk about your bass and your
band! I plugged in my headphones, clicked on the HD button on YouTube
and really enjoyed you guys! Great tune. Must go practice guitar now.

Julian


On Jul 1, 2009, at 10:37 AM, Jarod Dixon wrote:

>
>
> Friend has a Flip Ultra HD, and it does a LOT better in low light
> than my Cannon HF-100.
>
> As for sound it seems ok, but he mainly puts it in situations where
> the volume is a bit too much:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChBKTVYB0kY
>
> (achem, me on bass)
>
> Jarod the seldom poster.
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Julian Seery Gude"
> <julian@...> wrote:
> >
> > I'd love your take on the best cheap Mini HD camcorder.
> >
> > Here are the contenders as far as I can tell (please add on your
> fave if you prefer it over these)
> >
> > - Flip Ultra HD
> > - Flip Mino HD
> > - Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10
> > - Kodak Zi6
> >
> > I admit I like the pistol grip form factor of the Xacti and prefer
> both the Kodak/Xacti because you can use your own memory card. BUT,
> I've watched videos' on Vimeo where the Flips having better video
> quality and low light performance. What about sound quality? The
> Flip's seem to do poorly in this area?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Julian
> >
>
>
>

---
Julian Seery Gude
julian@... {561} 584-9088 {skype} exceler8
chief exceler8or @ exceler8 Corporation ~ www.exceler8.com
editor @ LOCAL Na8ion ~ www.LOCALNa8ion.com
Learn more about me: http://www.google.com/profiles/JulianSeeryGude



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I figured that clip would show how it does in a poorly lit situation. That place
(obviously) has just a bit of red lighting which my normally awesome Cannon just
hates.

Only thing I dislike about the flips is it's form factor - but that's just my
preference. I find the Xacti's more comfortable.

iPhone at 720 would be fantastic!

Jarod



--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Julian Seery Gude <julian@...> wrote:
>
> Hey Jarod,
>
> Great example - I think the video looks and sounds pretty good for a
> live performance. But screw video, let's talk about your bass and your
> band! I plugged in my headphones, clicked on the HD button on YouTube
> and really enjoyed you guys! Great tune. Must go practice guitar now.
>
> Julian
>
>
> On Jul 1, 2009, at 10:37 AM, Jarod Dixon wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Friend has a Flip Ultra HD, and it does a LOT better in low light
> > than my Cannon HF-100.
> >
> > As for sound it seems ok, but he mainly puts it in situations where
> > the volume is a bit too much:
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChBKTVYB0kY
> >
> > (achem, me on bass)
> >
> > Jarod the seldom poster.
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Julian Seery Gude"
> > <julian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'd love your take on the best cheap Mini HD camcorder.
> > >
> > > Here are the contenders as far as I can tell (please add on your
> > fave if you prefer it over these)
> > >
> > > - Flip Ultra HD
> > > - Flip Mino HD
> > > - Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10
> > > - Kodak Zi6
> > >
> > > I admit I like the pistol grip form factor of the Xacti and prefer
> > both the Kodak/Xacti because you can use your own memory card. BUT,
> > I've watched videos' on Vimeo where the Flips having better video
> > quality and low light performance. What about sound quality? The
> > Flip's seem to do poorly in this area?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Julian
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> ---
> Julian Seery Gude
> julian@... {561} 584-9088 {skype} exceler8
> chief exceler8or @ exceler8 Corporation ~ www.exceler8.com
> editor @ LOCAL Na8ion ~ www.LOCALNa8ion.com
> Learn more about me: http://www.google.com/profiles/JulianSeeryGude
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I just recently bought the Xacti CG10. It's a nice little camera. I shot my
latest video on it - http://www.disposablemedia.ca No filters on that video and
the audio is as is. Only thing I did with it was cross-fades.

I'm not a fan of the Flips. Hate the brick style form factor. The pistol grip on
the Xacti is great though.

If you're going to edit the footage you shoot in FCP or FCE from the Xacti, you
have to convert the files to Apple Intermediate Codec first. I think iMovie can
edit the files without doing anything to them.

David
http://www.disposablemedia.ca

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Julian Seery Gude" <julian@...> wrote:
>
> I'd love your take on the best cheap Mini HD camcorder.
>
> Here are the contenders as far as I can tell (please add on your fave if you
prefer it over these)
>
> - Flip Ultra HD
> - Flip Mino HD
> - Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10
> - Kodak Zi6
>
> I admit I like the pistol grip form factor of the Xacti and prefer both the
Kodak/Xacti because you can use your own memory card. BUT, I've watched videos'
on Vimeo where the Flips having better video quality and low light performance.
What about sound quality? The Flip's seem to do poorly in this area?
>
> Thanks
>
> Julian
>

Thanks for posting my writeup, Jeffrey, and for stimulating discussion
here.

Two things I got excited about were -

1) giving developers of FOSS video editing apps feedback and advice about
UI, workflows and the like. They really need video creators to tell them
what they want and need. I know Ryanne and Verdi talked with a few of them
(and gave a great presentation on the same).

2) how remixing continues to become more mainstream, especially "fan"
remixes and mashups - most notably evidenced by John McIntosh's
Buffy/Twilight mashup - which is getting really popular. (
http://www.rebelliouspixels.com/2009/buffy-vs-edward-twilight-remixed)

It also got me thinking about what else we can do to really help people
become more video-literate in general.

Lauren Galanter

www.laurengalanter.com
www.linkedin.com/in/laureng
610-761-4435


On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Jeffrey Taylor
<thejeffreytaylor@...>wrote:

>
>
> I'm surprised we're over a week out and people haven't brought back their
> takes to the list, but Lauren G. just put up a blog post with her take:
>
> http://laurengalanter.com/2009/06/30/open-video-round-up/
>
> What did the other attendees think about the Conference, and what is there
> to tell people beyond the <video> tag and OGG Theora? I'll chime in later,
> but I just wanted start the conversation.
>
> --
> Jeffrey Taylor
> 912 Cole St, #349
> San Francisco, CA 94117
> USA
> Mobile: +14157281264
> Fax: +33177722734
> http://twitter.com/jeffreytaylor
> http://organicconversations.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hey all,
I just launched a new project called Tangent. It's a bit more coherent than
things I've made in the past.

It's a history series that shows how all things past, present, and future
are related and reciprocal. The pilot episode shows how credit cards are
related to the Pledge of Allegiance, Eisenhower, and the Interstate Highway
System.
http://tangent.ws

The show is only half the news though. I'm also crowdfunding the production
budget. I've split the show up into $10 shares, kept 51%, and am selling off
the other 49% to individual investors. These investors will potentially
profit from any ad revenue or licensing fees the show makes over the next 2
years.

I've laid it out in fairly simple terms here:
http://tangent.ws/funding

So if you have some extra loot lying around (and really who doesn't these
days), I'd love your support. I'm going to be busting my ass to get this
thing spread across the web, and glad-handing my way into as many
distribution deals as possible. So it may actually be possible to make some
money off this thing. No promises though.

Also, if you have any press contacts that may be interested in this sort of
crowdfunding/microfinancing story, please send them my way.

Ok,
AQ

http://tangent.ws
http://wreckandsalvage.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

nice, adam!

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Adam Quirk <quirk@...>wrote:

>
>
> Hey all,
> I just launched a new project called Tangent. It's a bit more coherent than
> things I've made in the past.
>
> It's a history series that shows how all things past, present, and future
> are related and reciprocal. The pilot episode shows how credit cards are
> related to the Pledge of Allegiance, Eisenhower, and the Interstate Highway
> System.
> http://tangent.ws
>
> The show is only half the news though. I'm also crowdfunding the production
> budget. I've split the show up into $10 shares, kept 51%, and am selling
> off
> the other 49% to individual investors. These investors will potentially
> profit from any ad revenue or licensing fees the show makes over the next 2
> years.
>
> I've laid it out in fairly simple terms here:
> http://tangent.ws/funding
>
> So if you have some extra loot lying around (and really who doesn't these
> days), I'd love your support. I'm going to be busting my ass to get this
> thing spread across the web, and glad-handing my way into as many
> distribution deals as possible. So it may actually be possible to make some
> money off this thing. No promises though.
>
> Also, if you have any press contacts that may be interested in this sort of
> crowdfunding/microfinancing story, please send them my way.
>
> Ok,
> AQ
>
> http://tangent.ws
> http://wreckandsalvage.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

FYI
http://rhizome.org/editorial/2739


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks Sull.
And thanks for doing all the legwork for me when I was researching
crowdfunding :)
http://crowdfunding.pbworks.com/

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Michael Sullivan <sulleleven@...>wrote:

> nice, adam!
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Adam Quirk <quirk@...
> >wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hey all,
> > I just launched a new project called Tangent. It's a bit more coherent
> than
> > things I've made in the past.
> >
> > It's a history series that shows how all things past, present, and future
> > are related and reciprocal. The pilot episode shows how credit cards are
> > related to the Pledge of Allegiance, Eisenhower, and the Interstate
> Highway
> > System.
> > http://tangent.ws
> >
> > The show is only half the news though. I'm also crowdfunding the
> production
> > budget. I've split the show up into $10 shares, kept 51%, and am selling
> > off
> > the other 49% to individual investors. These investors will potentially
> > profit from any ad revenue or licensing fees the show makes over the next
> 2
> > years.
> >
> > I've laid it out in fairly simple terms here:
> > http://tangent.ws/funding
> >
> > So if you have some extra loot lying around (and really who doesn't these
> > days), I'd love your support. I'm going to be busting my ass to get this
> > thing spread across the web, and glad-handing my way into as many
> > distribution deals as possible. So it may actually be possible to make
> some
> > money off this thing. No promises though.
> >
> > Also, if you have any press contacts that may be interested in this sort
> of
> > crowdfunding/microfinancing story, please send them my way.
> >
> > Ok,
> > AQ
> >
> > http://tangent.ws
> > http://wreckandsalvage.com
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Looks cool. Reminds me of that TV show "Connections".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connections_(TV_series) Always loved it!

Great idea on pulling people in as investors to fund it.

Good luck with the project!

David
http://www.disposablemedia.ca

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adam Quirk <quirk@...> wrote:
>
> Hey all,
> I just launched a new project called Tangent. It's a bit more coherent than
> things I've made in the past.
>
> It's a history series that shows how all things past, present, and future
> are related and reciprocal. The pilot episode shows how credit cards are
> related to the Pledge of Allegiance, Eisenhower, and the Interstate Highway
> System.
> http://tangent.ws
>
> The show is only half the news though. I'm also crowdfunding the production
> budget. I've split the show up into $10 shares, kept 51%, and am selling off
> the other 49% to individual investors. These investors will potentially
> profit from any ad revenue or licensing fees the show makes over the next 2
> years.
>
> I've laid it out in fairly simple terms here:
> http://tangent.ws/funding
>
> So if you have some extra loot lying around (and really who doesn't these
> days), I'd love your support. I'm going to be busting my ass to get this
> thing spread across the web, and glad-handing my way into as many
> distribution deals as possible. So it may actually be possible to make some
> money off this thing. No promises though.
>
> Also, if you have any press contacts that may be interested in this sort of
> crowdfunding/microfinancing story, please send them my way.
>
> Ok,
> AQ
>
> http://tangent.ws
> http://wreckandsalvage.com
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I added your project and text from the about page.


On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Adam Quirk <quirk@...>wrote:

>
>
> Thanks Sull.
> And thanks for doing all the legwork for me when I was researching
> crowdfunding :)
> http://crowdfunding.pbworks.com/
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Michael Sullivan
<sulleleven@...<sulleleven%40gmail.com>
> >wrote:
>
>
> > nice, adam!
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Adam Quirk
<quirk@...<quirk%40wreckandsalvage.com>
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hey all,
> > > I just launched a new project called Tangent. It's a bit more coherent
> > than
> > > things I've made in the past.
> > >
> > > It's a history series that shows how all things past, present, and
> future
> > > are related and reciprocal. The pilot episode shows how credit cards
> are
> > > related to the Pledge of Allegiance, Eisenhower, and the Interstate
> > Highway
> > > System.
> > > http://tangent.ws
> > >
> > > The show is only half the news though. I'm also crowdfunding the
> > production
> > > budget. I've split the show up into $10 shares, kept 51%, and am
> selling
> > > off
> > > the other 49% to individual investors. These investors will potentially
> > > profit from any ad revenue or licensing fees the show makes over the
> next
> > 2
> > > years.
> > >
> > > I've laid it out in fairly simple terms here:
> > > http://tangent.ws/funding
> > >
> > > So if you have some extra loot lying around (and really who doesn't
> these
> > > days), I'd love your support. I'm going to be busting my ass to get
> this
> > > thing spread across the web, and glad-handing my way into as many
> > > distribution deals as possible. So it may actually be possible to make
> > some
> > > money off this thing. No promises though.
> > >
> > > Also, if you have any press contacts that may be interested in this
> sort
> > of
> > > crowdfunding/microfinancing story, please send them my way.
> > >
> > > Ok,
> > > AQ
> > >
> > > http://tangent.ws
> > > http://wreckandsalvage.com
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> I just launched a new project called Tangent. It's a bit more coherent than
> things I've made in the past.
> It's a history series that shows how all things past, present, and future
> are related and reciprocal. The pilot episode shows how credit cards are
> related to the Pledge of Allegiance, Eisenhower, and the Interstate Highway
> System.
> http://tangent.ws

Did you use Wordpress to create this site?

Jay



--
http://ryanishungry.com
http://jaydedman.com
http://twitter.com/jaydedman
917 371 6790

We made a video about the subject for http://visionontv.org this is part
one: http://plugandplay.visionon.tv/

Part 2 coming soon.

Hamish

very relevant:
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020620.html

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:08 PM, hamish <hamish@...> wrote:

> We made a video about the subject for http://visionontv.org this is part
> one: http://plugandplay.visionon.tv/
>
> Part 2 coming soon.
>
> Hamish
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> very relevant:
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020620.html

Good find. Ill add some context to Tim's link. Because the different
browsers cant agree to support the same codecs, video creators must fight to
figure out how to work across all browsers if they want to use the <video>
tag in html 5.

   Apple refuses to implement Ogg Theora in Quicktime by default (as used
>   by Safari), citing lack of hardware support and an uncertain patent
>   landscape.
>
>   Google has implemented H.264 and Ogg Theora in Chrome, but cannot
>   provide the H.264 codec license to third-party distributors of
>   Chromium, and have indicated a belief that Ogg Theora's quality-per-bit
>   is not yet suitable for the volume handled by YouTube.
>
>   Opera refuses to implement H.264, citing the obscene cost of the
>   relevant patent licenses.
>
>   Mozilla refuses to implement H.264, as they would not be able to obtain
>   a license that covers their downstream distributors.
>
>   Microsoft has not commented on their intent to support <video> at all.
>


Jay

--
http://ryanishungry.com
http://jaydedman.com
http://twitter.com/jaydedman
917 371 6790


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Yeah, it's a theme called TV Elements. I just added the "Download" link on the
bottom left of the video, and integrated an Amazon shopping cart on the
http://tangent.ws/funding page
Sent via dynamic wireless technology device

-----Original Message-----
From: Jay dedman <jay.dedman@...>

Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 15:44:50
To: <videoblogging@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Tangent, a crowdfunding experiment


> I just launched a new project called Tangent. It's a bit more coherent than
> things I've made in the past.
> It's a history series that shows how all things past, present, and future
> are related and reciprocal. The pilot episode shows how credit cards are
> related to the Pledge of Allegiance, Eisenhower, and the Interstate Highway
> System.
> http://tangent.ws

Did you use Wordpress to create this site?

Jay



--
http://ryanishungry.com
http://jaydedman.com
http://twitter.com/jaydedman
917 371 6790


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

> I'm surprised we're over a week out and people haven't brought back their
> takes to the list, but Lauren G. just put up a blog post with her take:
> http://laurengalanter.com/2009/06/30/open-video-round-up/
> What did the other attendees think about the Conference, and what is there
> to tell people beyond the <video> tag and OGG Theora? I'll chime in later,
> but I just wanted start the conversation.

The conference confirmed several things I already thought....and introduced
some surprises.

Many people discussed the need for independent creators to become more
decentralized. As we see more and more free commercial hosting sites close
down, creators need to think about hosting their own content IF they care
about it lasting online. Many people just throw a video up like disposable
graffiti, but others will want to make sure their videos live on. So
archiving is a big issue.

Creators (me included) are still confused as to what the <video> and
<canvas> tags will do for our own creativity. We need more examples to get
inspired by the fact that we can now use video in html like any other
element. No more trapped in a player. If you could make videos do anything,
what would you want to do? Here are some links to see where we're at. Sull
says he's share his experiments.

    - http://people.mozilla.com/~prouget/demos/
    - http://blog.mozbox.org/
    -
   
http://blog.mozbox.org/post/2009/04/12/Firefox-35%3A-a-new-experiment-with-Canva\
s-Video

The codec wars rage on. Still a lot of confusion among creators why they
should care about Ogg/Theora instead of flash, mp4, or h264. What is an open
source codec? Tim linked to a good explanation here:
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020620.html A
FOSS (free and open source) standard helps innovation.

The most surprising thing was the state of FOSS video editors. I had no idea
how far they had come along the past 3 years. I learned that much work has
been put into building the libraries, transcoders, etc. Now each project is
more just dealing with interface. This is a huge win. Pitivi (
http://www.pitivi.org) and VLC (http://www.videolan.org/vlc/) are the main
ones we saw. Unlike the editors we all use, you can throw any codec into it,
and the program should know how to play it. I'm still a couple years from
dumping iMovie/FCP, but I like the idea of more capability rather than less.

All in all, the train rolls on. Commercial companies has baked in a lot of
innovation and provided stability to web video...while the greassroots
continue to do the advanced research and push the envelope of what we want
to do.

Jay


--
http://ryanishungry.com
http://jaydedman.com
http://twitter.com/jaydedman
917 371 6790


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> Yeah, it's a theme called TV Elements. I just added the "Download" link on the
bottom left of the video, and integrated an Amazon >shopping cart on the
http://tangent.ws/funding page

Site really looks good.
Conspiracy theories or truth? You decide.

Jay


--
http://ryanishungry.com
http://jaydedman.com
http://twitter.com/jaydedman
917 371 6790

Great post Jay. Some thoughts below...

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Jay dedman <jay.dedman@...> wrote:

> > I'm surprised we're over a week out and people haven't brought back their
> > takes to the list, but Lauren G. just put up a blog post with her take:
> > http://laurengalanter.com/2009/06/30/open-video-round-up/
> > What did the other attendees think about the Conference, and what is
> there
> > to tell people beyond the <video> tag and OGG Theora? I'll chime in
> later,
> > but I just wanted start the conversation.
>
> The conference confirmed several things I already thought....and introduced
> some surprises.
>
> Many people discussed the need for independent creators to become more
> decentralized. As we see more and more free commercial hosting sites close
> down, creators need to think about hosting their own content IF they care
> about it lasting online. Many people just throw a video up like disposable
> graffiti, but others will want to make sure their videos live on. So
> archiving is a big issue.


We need to be decentralized but centralized. We need to be semantically
centralized but physically decentralized. People use YouTube because that's
where they can find an audience. We need a YouTube of independent video --
something that can aggregate an audience without relying on one
legal/physical choke point.


>
>
> Creators (me included) are still confused as to what the <video> and
> <canvas> tags will do for our own creativity. We need more examples to get
> inspired by the fact that we can now use video in html like any other
> element. No more trapped in a player. If you could make videos do anything,
> what would you want to do? Here are some links to see where we're at. Sull
> says he's share his experiments.
>
>   - http://people.mozilla.com/~prouget/demos/
>   - http://blog.mozbox.org/
>   -
>
>
http://blog.mozbox.org/post/2009/04/12/Firefox-35%3A-a-new-experiment-with-Canva\
s-Video
>
> The codec wars rage on. Still a lot of confusion among creators why they
> should care about Ogg/Theora instead of flash, mp4, or h264. What is an
> open
> source codec? Tim linked to a good explanation here:
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020620.htmlA
> FOSS (free and open source) standard helps innovation.


As that post on WHATWG points out, the FOSS codec theora, according to
Apple, isn't actually free of legal constraints (Apple sites patent issues).
Perhaps Apple is using this as a smokescreen since they can't easily support
theora on the iPod so it makes no sense for them to push the codec... But
there do seem to be both legal and structural issues (the hardware decoder
issues) that are preventing big vendors (Apple, MS) from adopting the codec.
And though Google put it in Chrome, they still won't commit to using <video>
with theora on YouTube.


>
>
> The most surprising thing was the state of FOSS video editors. I had no
> idea
> how far they had come along the past 3 years. I learned that much work has
> been put into building the libraries, transcoders, etc. Now each project is
> more just dealing with interface. This is a huge win. Pitivi (
> http://www.pitivi.org) and VLC (http://www.videolan.org/vlc/) are the main
> ones we saw. Unlike the editors we all use, you can throw any codec into
> it,
> and the program should know how to play it. I'm still a couple years from
> dumping iMovie/FCP, but I like the idea of more capability rather than
> less.
>
> All in all, the train rolls on. Commercial companies has baked in a lot of
> innovation and provided stability to web video...while the greassroots
> continue to do the advanced research and push the envelope of what we want
> to do.
>
> Jay
>
>
> --
> http://ryanishungry.com
> http://jaydedman.com
> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> 917 371 6790
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> As that post on WHATWG points out, the FOSS codec theora, according to
> Apple, isn't actually free of legal constraints (Apple sites patent issues).
> Perhaps Apple is using this as a smokescreen since they can't easily support
> theora on the iPod so it makes no sense for them to push the codec... But
> there do seem to be both legal and structural issues (the hardware decoder
> issues) that are preventing big vendors (Apple, MS) from adopting the codec.
> And though Google put it in Chrome, they still won't commit to using <video>
> with theora on YouTube.

This is the discussion of codec nerds, but I would put money down that
Apple/Nokia are using scare tactics when it comes to the "submarine"
patents of Ogg/Theora. It's bulllllllllll-shit.

Michael Dale, who I have crazy respect for, lays it down here:
http://metavid.org/blog/2007/12/11/the-attack-against-ogg-theora-or-how-i-learne\
d-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-proprietary-web/

As the WHATWG email points out
(http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020620.htmlA),
all is takes is for Google Chrome to adopt Ogg/Theora to prove it's
not a big deal. It's all about strategy. Google didnt have any issues
taking in Youtube's copyright problems because they felt it was a win.

The main point for all creators to understand is this: H264 and Flash
feel very free (as in cost) to us. But for developers of browsers or
editing software, there is a cost to be able to use those codecs. So
the cost comes in headaches and lack of innovation. This is why 50% of
the emails on this list are always about compression... and why your
"x" camera files dont work on your "y" editing program on your "z"
operating system.

Jay

--
http://ryanishungry.com
http://jaydedman.com
http://twitter.com/jaydedman
917 371 6790

ah man!  they removed the video element from latest draft?
i'll have to read up on this later.
that's annoying news.  hopefully the browsers keep supporting it though.

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:16 PM, t. whid <email.t.whid@...> wrote:

>
>
> very relevant:
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020620.html
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:08 PM, hamish
<hamish@...<hamish%40undercurrents.org>>
> wrote:
>
> > We made a video about the subject for http://visionontv.org this is part
> > one: http://plugandplay.visionon.tv/
> >
> > Part 2 coming soon.
> >
> > Hamish
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

i feel like i'm voting for nader all over again ;)

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Michael Sullivan <sulleleven@...>wrote:

> ah man!  they removed the video element from latest draft?
> i'll have to read up on this later.
> that's annoying news.  hopefully the browsers keep supporting it though.
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:16 PM, t. whid <email.t.whid@...> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> very relevant:
>> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020620.html
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:08 PM, hamish
<hamish@...<hamish%40undercurrents.org>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > We made a video about the subject for http://visionontv.org this is
>> part
>> > one: http://plugandplay.visionon.tv/
>> >
>> > Part 2 coming soon.
>> >
>> > Hamish
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> ah man! they removed the video element from latest draft?
> i'll have to read up on this later.
> that's annoying news. hopefully the browsers keep supporting it though.

No, the <video> element still exists. But the standards body is not
recommending a specific codec that will be standard. So each browser
seems to be choosing the codec that is most politically convenient.
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020620.html

Jay


--
http://ryanishungry.com
http://jaydedman.com
http://twitter.com/jaydedman
917 371 6790

i see. ok.

"A codec agnostic implementation of the *video* tag is next to worthless. A
> simple javaScript
library<http://metavid.ucsc.edu/blog/2007/06/07/html5-video-the-future-is-now/>c\
ould accomplish the same thing. Codec agnostic video tag represents no
> significant difference from the object/embed tags that we already have
> today. If web developers can�t count on a given codec being supported the
> video tag is likely to go nowhere fast. If that approach is taken video will
> remain a second class web citizen wrapped up in proprietary encapsulations.
> The whole point of the w3c is to promote/develop
interoperable<http://www.w3.org/>technologies. In the current
> browser
environment<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers>non-free
implementations are simply
> *not interoperable*. The w3c would be going against their own
position<http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#def-essential>and
obsoleting themselves in the process if they take the codec agnostic
> approach."
>

via
http://metavid.org/blog/2007/12/11/the-attack-against-ogg-theora-or-how-i-learne\
d-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-proprietary-web/

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Jay dedman <jay.dedman@...> wrote:

>
>
> > ah man! they removed the video element from latest draft?
> > i'll have to read up on this later.
> > that's annoying news. hopefully the browsers keep supporting it though.
>
> No, the <video> element still exists. But the standards body is not
> recommending a specific codec that will be standard. So each browser
> seems to be choosing the codec that is most politically convenient.
> http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-June/020620.html
>
> Jay
>
> --
> http://ryanishungry.com
> http://jaydedman.com
> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
> 917 371 6790
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Help!  I need to let some people upload videos, which they will then
embed on a members-only Wordpress blog.

The people publishing the files can't use FTP to upload the files to a
private server.

So I need them to be able to upload to a free video sharing site like
Blip or YouTube.

BUT they don't want the videos to be discoverable by random internet
users via search or browsing.  They only want them to be seen where
they're embedded, by the members of the site.

What's the best way to let them upload a video which can only be seen
where it's embedded, not by random users browsing/searching on the
video sharing site.  Do any of the hosting/sharing sites offer this
kind of service?

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

blip pro has feature to hide uploaded videos.
never tried it but i assume those videos could be embedded.
they are just not listed on the site.

else, you could play with apache and referrer/ip restrictions.

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Rupert <rupert@...> wrote:

>
>
> Help! I need to let some people upload videos, which they will then
> embed on a members-only Wordpress blog.
>
> The people publishing the files can't use FTP to upload the files to a
> private server.
>
> So I need them to be able to upload to a free video sharing site like
> Blip or YouTube.
>
> BUT they don't want the videos to be discoverable by random internet
> users via search or browsing. They only want them to be seen where
> they're embedded, by the members of the site.
>
> What's the best way to let them upload a video which can only be seen
> where it's embedded, not by random users browsing/searching on the
> video sharing site. Do any of the hosting/sharing sites offer this
> kind of service?
>
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]