Essentially it looks like a sales pitch for Brightcove.. perhaps they
should be paying you to attend.. :)

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Rupert Howe <rupert@...> wrote:
> It's free?!
> If anybody here is going to this, would love to have a peek at their
> notes :)
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
>
> On 30 Apr 2010, at 18:56, Joly MacFie wrote:
>
>> Free - 28 tix left - http://
>> brightcovevideomonetization.eventbrite.com/
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Streaming Media Xtra <StreamingMedia.Xtra@...>
>> Date: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 8:20 AM
>> Subject: Online Video Monetization Summit, May 5th in NYC
>>
>> <http://www.brightcove.com/> Cannot see this email? *View it as a Web
>> page*<#1284ea994584db69_>
>> . <http://tracking.onlineinc.com/sponsorhit.aspx?sponsorship_id=14466>
>>
>> On May 5th, 2010 in New York, Brightcove will bring together key
>> industry
>> leaders for a compelling look at the future of video monetization.
>>
>> This 1-day event will give digital media and marketing professionals
>> the
>> opportunity to hear directly from the leaders shaping the industry
>> and learn
>> about winning strategies and best practices from the organizations
>> already
>> succeeding today.
>>
>> *See the full agenda and register for the
>> event<http://tracking.onlineinc.com/sponsorhit.aspx?sponsorship_id=14466
>> >
>> * →
>>
>> *Speakers include:*
>>
>> - Jeremy Allaire, CEO, Brightcove
>> - Rob Davis, Interactive Marketing Director, Ogilvy Interactive
>> - Adam Gerber, CMO, Quantcast
>> - Frans Vermeulen, VP of Client & Business Services, FreeWheel
>> - Erica Crossen, Director of Best Practices & Advertising Operations,
>> Brightcove
>> - Chris Johnston, Director of Technology Partners, Brightcove
>>
>> This event is complimentary and space is limited. Don't wait to sign
>> up!
>>
>> <http://tracking.onlineinc.com/sponsorhit.aspx?sponsorship_id=14466>
>>
>> We look forward to seeing you there.
>>
>> The Brightcove Video Monetization Team
>>
>> Brightcove is a Web-based platform that makes it easy to deliver
>> professional-quality video experiences through your website. Unlike
>> free
>> video sharing sites, Brightcove gives you complete control over the
>> video
>> experience you put on your site. Organizations of all sizes choose
>> Brightcove for its ease of use and its power to scale from the
>> simplest
>> project to the most complex.
>>
>> © 2010 Brightcove, Inc. One Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142,
>> USA
>> *Terms & Conditions* <http://www.brightcove.com/terms-and-conditions/>
>> *Privacy
>> Policy* <http://www.brightcove.com/en/privacy>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> *NOTICE:* Recipients of the Streaming Media Xtra e-newsletter will
>> occasionally receive information on certain products and services.
>>
>> To subscribe to Streaming Media magazine, go to:
>> http://www.streamingmedia.com/magazine/
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the Streaming Media Bulletin please click below:
>>
http://listserv.onlineinc.com/unsubscribe.aspx?bounce.13321.395524@bounce.infoto\
day.com
>>
>> Copyright 2010, Streaming Media, a Division of Information Today,
>> 143 Old Marlton Pike, Medford, NJ 08055-8750, USA; (609) 654-6266,
>> http://www.infotoday.com
>>
>> Problems with this message? Send an e-mail to help@....
>> Please do
>> not reply to this message, as it was sent from an unattended mailbox.
>>
>> --
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
>> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
>> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
>> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>



--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
  http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
   Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
---------------------------------------------------------------

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "elbowsofdeath" <steve@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the info Michael, good to hear that Firefox are joining the
hardware accelerated fun.
>
> Some recent developments...
>
> Jobs has been justifying Apple's flash stance, Adobe have fired back,
both have some valid points but are deliberately avoiding other truths.
>
> OS X 10.6.3 allows third parties to access the hardware H.264 decoding
that some recent Macs support. Adobe have taken advantage of this by
releasing a version of the flash player that uses this decoding, it
certainly helps HD content use much less CPU.
>
> Microsoft have confirmed that IE9 will be supporting H.264 for HTML5
video, but that the only format they plan to support, causing a
predictable backlash:
>
[snip]

I have a lot of new video go put up but I can't figure out what format
to encode.  I had been happy with Flash embedded with vPIP, but now I am
worried about "data rot".  What is going to happen to all my existing
videos?

I've been playing around with the iPad and liking it very much but I
don't think the app route is suitable for a schlub film maker like me
who is not a coder and cannot afford to hire them.  I like having my
videos on the web, available on any platform free of charge.  But what
to put out?

Anyone have any experience with the Jilion SublimeVideo Flash mode
Player?  Looks interesting.
http://blog.jilion.com/2010/04/07/sublimevideo-flash-mode

I've also been wondering about the ON2 (Google) VP8....

Oh well.  I just dread the idea of having to go back to original video
and re-encode hundreds of clips to something that could be obsolete in a
few years....

Stan Hirson
http://PinePlainsViews.com
http://Hestakaup.com

:) I know, it's always a case of listening to a series of people
giving you a sales pitch at these things, however well disguised it is
- but they still usually try to charge you for the pleasure, roping in
an array of clueless suckers who are desperate not to be left behind.
But it's still interesting to hear how businesses are selling online
video at the moment.
Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv/

On 1 May 2010, at 10:44, Joly MacFie wrote:

> Essentially it looks like a sales pitch for Brightcove.. perhaps they
> should be paying you to attend.. :)
>
> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 2:47 AM, Rupert Howe <rupert@...>
> wrote:
> > It's free?!
> > If anybody here is going to this, would love to have a peek at their
> > notes :)
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> > On 30 Apr 2010, at 18:56, Joly MacFie wrote:
> >
> >> Free - 28 tix left - http://
> >> brightcovevideomonetization.eventbrite.com/
> >>
> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >> From: Streaming Media Xtra <StreamingMedia.Xtra@...>
> >> Date: Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 8:20 AM
> >> Subject: Online Video Monetization Summit, May 5th in NYC
> >>
> >> <http://www.brightcove.com/> Cannot see this email? *View it as a
> Web
> >> page*<#1284ea994584db69_>
> >> . <http://tracking.onlineinc.com/sponsorhit.aspx?sponsorship_id=14466
> >
> >>
> >> On May 5th, 2010 in New York, Brightcove will bring together key
> >> industry
> >> leaders for a compelling look at the future of video monetization.
> >>
> >> This 1-day event will give digital media and marketing
> professionals
> >> the
> >> opportunity to hear directly from the leaders shaping the industry
> >> and learn
> >> about winning strategies and best practices from the organizations
> >> already
> >> succeeding today.
> >>
> >> *See the full agenda and register for the
> >> event<http://tracking.onlineinc.com/sponsorhit.aspx?sponsorship_id=14466
> >> >
> >> * →
> >>
> >> *Speakers include:*
> >>
> >> - Jeremy Allaire, CEO, Brightcove
> >> - Rob Davis, Interactive Marketing Director, Ogilvy Interactive
> >> - Adam Gerber, CMO, Quantcast
> >> - Frans Vermeulen, VP of Client & Business Services, FreeWheel
> >> - Erica Crossen, Director of Best Practices & Advertising
> Operations,
> >> Brightcove
> >> - Chris Johnston, Director of Technology Partners, Brightcove
> >>
> >> This event is complimentary and space is limited. Don't wait to
> sign
> >> up!
> >>
> >> <http://tracking.onlineinc.com/sponsorhit.aspx?
> sponsorship_id=14466>
> >>
> >> We look forward to seeing you there.
> >>
> >> The Brightcove Video Monetization Team
> >>
> >> Brightcove is a Web-based platform that makes it easy to deliver
> >> professional-quality video experiences through your website. Unlike
> >> free
> >> video sharing sites, Brightcove gives you complete control over the
> >> video
> >> experience you put on your site. Organizations of all sizes choose
> >> Brightcove for its ease of use and its power to scale from the
> >> simplest
> >> project to the most complex.
> >>
> >> © 2010 Brightcove, Inc. One Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142,
> >> USA
> >> *Terms & Conditions* <http://www.brightcove.com/terms-and-conditions/
> >
> >> *Privacy
> >> Policy* <http://www.brightcove.com/en/privacy>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> *NOTICE:* Recipients of the Streaming Media Xtra e-newsletter will
> >> occasionally receive information on certain products and services.
> >>
> >> To subscribe to Streaming Media magazine, go to:
> >> http://www.streamingmedia.com/magazine/
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe from the Streaming Media Bulletin please click
> below:
> >>
http://listserv.onlineinc.com/unsubscribe.aspx?bounce.13321.395524@bounce.infoto\
day.com
> >>
> >> Copyright 2010, Streaming Media, a Division of Information Today,
> >> 143 Old Marlton Pike, Medford, NJ 08055-8750, USA; (609) 654-6266,
> >> http://www.infotoday.com
> >>
> >> Problems with this message? Send an e-mail to help@....
> >> Please do
> >> not reply to this message, as it was sent from an unattended
> mailbox.
> >>
> >> --
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> >> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> >> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> >> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>



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

Death, sex, birth and illness is apart of live, it's a cycle. too many
illnesses are kept private, there seems to be 2 camps, ones that get all the
support they need and publicly/medically and others that are hidden away and
get none or near none. I wish more did make videos that are hidden away, and
spoke out on many things. It also depends on personal preferences, by those
who wish to share and those that don't  have to read or watch.  Personally I
am hesitant to upload videos that need uploading because people do need to
see things that are often kept private or kept hidden behind closed doors,
whether by choice or forced on them, other reasons, the condition I am often
left in,  and was, so it improves for myself and others
.
If I could, I would show what my caregiver has to go through that I pay to
keep me alive, and her to get my clothes changed and me showered, which
isn't often . Why do people think it is strength to go though hell often and
not say anything, keep everything hidden, like humanity has done so much and
continues for eons.

This girl was blessed with medical care, a large loving supportive family
and thousands writing to her. When I watched I thought, her hair is died,
her eyebrows done, she is bathed and clean clothes, and surrounded by love,
and listened to her message.  If it was a baby, like Bethany on facebook
would your mind change? I think you would. Thousands were there being tested
for being possible donors

Jay made  a video of his mom dying from MS, I thought it was beautiful, with
family surrounding her. Many of us are alone and fighting to stay alive. She
also by doing this made friends online, many of us are bed/housebound, and
left information for those to find places to make connections like
caringbridge, although I have known about it for some time, I may join now.

And as mention you don't want to watch change the channel.

I abit behind in this topic I  had to go back and update and the comments.

thank you for posting her vidoe and the article. It also brings awareness to
donor transplants being needed

Cheryl
--
http://cherylspeaksout.blogspot.com

http://cherylbenson.ca

http://fineartamerica.com/profiles/cheryl-benson.html


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

she made lots of videos of her journey, I just watched more,  they made a
documentary of her, watched some of those too, what blogger with a story or
wanting awareness on issues to get out to the world wouldn't want that!
thousands more are now videologging on cystic fibrosis because of her, I
think it's awesome!
--
http://cherylspeaksout.blogspot.com

http://cherylbenson.ca

http://fineartamerica.com/profiles/cheryl-benson.html


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

I currently display in flash at 1mpbs 15fps, and then give additional
d/l options ogv + iPod (h264), and a link to YouTube. I also throw in
stills and mp3 and agg for those with low bandwidth.

See: http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=777

I think one is pretty much covered there..

Encoding ogv with the latest ffmpeg2theora is a snap now that I've
added a line to my template that automatically produces the command
line code.

I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
potential encumbrance.

http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=789

j

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 8:04 AM, stanhirson <shirson@...> wrote:
>
> -
> Oh well.  I just dread the idea of having to go back to original video
> and re-encode hundreds of clips to something that could be obsolete in a
> few years....
>
> Stan Hirson
> http://PinePlainsViews.com
> http://Hestakaup.com
>
>

--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
  http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
   Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
---------------------------------------------------------------

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
>

> I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
> potential encumbrance.
>

I wouldn't put much stock in that FUD. Also, all of these arguments
don't (and can't really) take into account VP8 that Google is
preparing to open source. Give them a few months to put it out there
and let's see how good it is and who adopts it. Until then people are
just fighting last year's battle.

- Verdi



--
Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society.
http://training.michaelverdi.com

On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Rupert Howe <rupert@...> wrote:
>
> It's free?!
> If anybody here is going to this, would love to have a peek at their
> notes :)
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv

It's a crock, they are just flogging their own stuff.
Notice no mention of the words Youtube or Adsense.
Making money from video blogs and other online content is easy, it's a
two step process:
1) Google Adsense ads
2) Youtube channel linked to Google Adsense.

Anything else is almost guaranteed to be a waste of time and effort.

Dave.

That's one way of making money as a producer, sure.  Particularly for
videobloggers, it's the easiest way.  But videobloggers are not really
the point here in this Brightcove thing.

People are finding and experimenting with other ways of making money
through online video apart from advertising, and apart from Google/YT
ads.  People interested in making money from independent production
don't want to just be dependent on the crumbs that Google throw their
way after they've plastered their content in keyword-targeted overlay
ads.

There are a lot of other things that producers, agencies, brands, etc
are interested in - and from what I saw of the breakdown of the day
it's not just a flog from Brightcove  - though sure, there'll be
plenty of that - and *of course* you wouldn't expect them to be
pimping Google in their description.

For an unusually free day, though, the main benefits would seem to me
to be the other people attending, who are usually the most interesting
part of events like this, and Brightcove's own data about people's
viewing habits & perspective on the future, and also the speakers from
Ogilvy, Tubemogul, Freewheel & Quantcast - and the discussions cover
things like:
Mobile Advertising, Over-the-Top Distribution, Advertising in Live
Events, Bringing TV Advertisers Online, Digital Ad serving Standards &
Audience Measurement & Profiling.
Especially given the profusion of IPTV Set Top Box, internet ready TV
sets and portable devices like the iPad this year.

Anyway, not perhaps a videoblogger thing, but I wouldn't say just a
crock

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

On 2 May 2010, at 00:56, David Jones wrote:

> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Rupert Howe <rupert@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > It's free?!
> > If anybody here is going to this, would love to have a peek at their
> > notes :)
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
>
> It's a crock, they are just flogging their own stuff.
> Notice no mention of the words Youtube or Adsense.
> Making money from video blogs and other online content is easy, it's a
> two step process:
> 1) Google Adsense ads
> 2) Youtube channel linked to Google Adsense.
>
> Anything else is almost guaranteed to be a waste of time and effort.
>
> Dave.
>
>



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

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@...> wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
> >
>
> > I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
> > potential encumbrance.
> >

the same comments were give about vorbis, where are the court cases?

A fair point is made in the comments in that article, that it isn't
worth the patent trolls time and money unless someone deep-pocketed
like Apple gets involved, but then they coud well come out of the
woodwork.

Another comment does, however, note his use of the passive tense to
describe this process.

http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=789


On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 12:56 AM, tom_a_sparks <tom_a_sparks@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@...> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
>> >
>>
>> > I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
>> > potential encumbrance.
>> >
>
> the same comments were give about vorbis, where are the court cases?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>



--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
  http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
   Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
---------------------------------------------------------------

In all Job's attacks on Flash, he didn't really talk about the
technical limitations of Flash video for animation/interactivity/media
synchronization - which is telling, since Apple systematically ignored
Quicktime development & interactive Quicktime for years - and have
basically just chopped Quicktime off at the knees.  For 10 years
Quicktime has been able to handle things that Flash still can't do.

If Jobs had made interactive Quicktime & Interactive Quicktime
development a priority 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago when video
was obviously about to happen in a big way, he might have avoided the
explosion in Flash video and the problems he's getting now, so he's
made his own bed AFAIC.

And now come a bit late to the party to push a 3rd party patented
codec that's not a great deal more useful than Flash, and dependent on
HTML5 or Apps for interactivity.

The ignoring and lack of development of Quicktime, one of their most
powerful technologies, is the biggest of the growing number of things
that (as a longtime Mac user) are making me dislike Apple more & more.

On another list, Adrian Miles talked about his "frustration at
industry 'innovators' wanting to treat video as a dumb object and
devices for playback as blackboxes".  Apple is the biggest culprit in
this.

Re the theora patent pool thing - as Verdi noted, it's the usual
patent Fear Uncertainty & Doubt, with absolutely no idea of whether
there's any substance that would allow an action to be brought, let
alone won.  It's the passive voice that I noticed - it's the present
continuous tense - *is being* rather than *has been* or *was being* -
- so it's something that's still underway, and presumably - since
theora is not new - has been going on for a while.

And I find it quite telling that VP8 hasn't featured in Job's letter
or response.  I hate the expression "elephant in the room" but really,
the fact that he can't even bring himself to mention it says to me
that  it undermines his argument about H.264 v Flash, even though I
agree with most of his points about Flash.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv



On 2 May 2010, at 08:15, Joly MacFie wrote:

> A fair point is made in the comments in that article, that it isn't
> worth the patent trolls time and money unless someone deep-pocketed
> like Apple gets involved, but then they coud well come out of the
> woodwork.
>
> Another comment does, however, note his use of the passive tense to
> describe this process.
>
> http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=789
>
> On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 12:56 AM, tom_a_sparks <tom_a_sparks@...
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@...>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
> >> >
> >>
> >> > I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
> >> > potential encumbrance.
> >> >
> >
> > the same comments were give about vorbis, where are the court cases?
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>



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

Jobs cant really say much about VP8 until oogle make an official announcement
about it can he? When that time comes, I predict the main argument will be along
the lines of lack of VP8 hardware decoding.

As for Quicktime,if we care about open standards then thank god Quicktime
multimedia development hasnt gone anywhere, or we'd still be trapped in the 2004
battle between Apple & Microsoft for codec/plugin dominance.

HTML5 is the best hope on that front, regardless of which codec is used for the
video & audio. There are already some basic tools in Adobe CS5 to enable some
limited sorts of flash stuff to be turned into HTML5, and within a few years
this stuff should explode in a  vendor-neutral way, leaving the video codec as
the only issue. So clearly I disagree that Apple are the biggest offender when
it comes to 'dumb video blackbox' stuff.

As for FUD, lets be honest, there is plenty of FUD about H.264 too. There are
legit issues for the future but its pretty telling that people who are against
H.264 took little comfort when the H.264 patent-pool managers pushed back any
woe for years.

Cheers

Steve

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe <rupert@...> wrote:
>
> In all Job's attacks on Flash, he didn't really talk about the
> technical limitations of Flash video for animation/interactivity/media
> synchronization - which is telling, since Apple systematically ignored
> Quicktime development & interactive Quicktime for years - and have
> basically just chopped Quicktime off at the knees.  For 10 years
> Quicktime has been able to handle things that Flash still can't do.
>
> If Jobs had made interactive Quicktime & Interactive Quicktime
> development a priority 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago when video
> was obviously about to happen in a big way, he might have avoided the
> explosion in Flash video and the problems he's getting now, so he's
> made his own bed AFAIC.
>
> And now come a bit late to the party to push a 3rd party patented
> codec that's not a great deal more useful than Flash, and dependent on
> HTML5 or Apps for interactivity.
>
> The ignoring and lack of development of Quicktime, one of their most
> powerful technologies, is the biggest of the growing number of things
> that (as a longtime Mac user) are making me dislike Apple more & more.
>
> On another list, Adrian Miles talked about his "frustration at
> industry 'innovators' wanting to treat video as a dumb object and
> devices for playback as blackboxes".  Apple is the biggest culprit in
> this.
>
> Re the theora patent pool thing - as Verdi noted, it's the usual
> patent Fear Uncertainty & Doubt, with absolutely no idea of whether
> there's any substance that would allow an action to be brought, let
> alone won.  It's the passive voice that I noticed - it's the present
> continuous tense - *is being* rather than *has been* or *was being* -
> - so it's something that's still underway, and presumably - since
> theora is not new - has been going on for a while.
>
> And I find it quite telling that VP8 hasn't featured in Job's letter
> or response.  I hate the expression "elephant in the room" but really,
> the fact that he can't even bring himself to mention it says to me
> that  it undermines his argument about H.264 v Flash, even though I
> agree with most of his points about Flash.
>
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
>
>
>
> On 2 May 2010, at 08:15, Joly MacFie wrote:
>
> > A fair point is made in the comments in that article, that it isn't
> > worth the patent trolls time and money unless someone deep-pocketed
> > like Apple gets involved, but then they coud well come out of the
> > woodwork.
> >
> > Another comment does, however, note his use of the passive tense to
> > describe this process.
> >
> > http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=789
> >
> > On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 12:56 AM, tom_a_sparks <tom_a_sparks@...
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> > I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
> > >> > potential encumbrance.
> > >> >
> > >
> > > the same comments were give about vorbis, where are the court cases?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> > Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

There is no future-proof perfect answer at this stage.

VP8 may be the longterm answer but even if its a roaring success it will take
years to reach the promised land.

Like it or not, H264 is the answer for at least the next few years, if not
longer. With one H.264 file you can cater for most hardware devices, and the
browsers that dont support it can still work with H.264 by playing it back via
flash.

Its not perfect, but its a lot better than the format mess we had to deal with 6
years ago.

Cheers

Steve Elbows

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "stanhirson" <shirson@...> wrote:

> I have a lot of new video go put up but I can't figure out what format
> to encode.  I had been happy with Flash embedded with vPIP, but now I am
> worried about "data rot".  What is going to happen to all my existing
> videos?
>
> Oh well.  I just dread the idea of having to go back to original video
> and re-encode hundreds of clips to something that could be obsolete in a
> few years....
>
> Stan Hirson
> http://PinePlainsViews.com
> http://Hestakaup.com
>

Looks like things may be about to turn uglier on this front:

http://blogs.fsfe.org/hugo/2010/04/open-letter-to-steve-jobs/

Jobs has apparently replied:

'From: Steve Jobs
To: Hugo Roy
Subject: Re:Open letter to Steve Jobs: Thoughts on Flash
Date 30/04/2010 15:21:17

All video codecs are covered by patents. A patent pool is being assembled to go
after Theora and other "open source" codecs now. Unfortunately, just because
something is open source, it doesn't mean or guarantee that it doesn't infringe
on others patents. An open standard is different from being royalty free or open
source.'


--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@...> wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
> >
>
> > I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
> > potential encumbrance.
> >
>
> I wouldn't put much stock in that FUD. Also, all of these arguments
> don't (and can't really) take into account VP8 that Google is
> preparing to open source. Give them a few months to put it out there
> and let's see how good it is and who adopts it. Until then people are
> just fighting last year's battle.
>
> - Verdi
>
>
>
> --
> Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia & Lymphoma
Society.
> http://training.michaelverdi.com
>

Isn't this where we started on this thread?

j

On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 10:17 AM, elbowsofdeath <steve@...> wrote:
> Looks like things may be about to turn uglier on this front:
>
> http://blogs.fsfe.org/hugo/2010/04/open-letter-to-steve-jobs/
>
> Jobs has apparently replied:
>
> 'From: Steve Jobs
> To: Hugo Roy
> Subject: Re:Open letter to Steve Jobs: Thoughts on Flash
> Date 30/04/2010 15:21:17
>
> All video codecs are covered by patents. A patent pool is being assembled to
go after Theora and other "open source" codecs now. Unfortunately, just because
something is open source, it doesn't mean or guarantee that it doesn't infringe
on others patents. An open standard is different from being royalty free or open
source.'
>
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@...> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
>> >
>>
>> > I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
>> > potential encumbrance.
>> >
>>
>> I wouldn't put much stock in that FUD. Also, all of these arguments
>> don't (and can't really) take into account VP8 that Google is
>> preparing to open source. Give them a few months to put it out there
>> and let's see how good it is and who adopts it. Until then people are
>> just fighting last year's battle.
>>
>> - Verdi
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia & Lymphoma
Society.
>> http://training.michaelverdi.com
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>



--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
  http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
   Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
---------------------------------------------------------------

heck, i'd pay somebody to go for me, or, to be specific, i'd give a piece of any
action to one who helps arrange it.

i would love to take the easy path, google adsense and youtube, but, as has
happened over and over in the history of the small screen, edgy material gets
pushed aside and has to find the new paths.

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe <rupert@...> wrote:
>
> That's one way of making money as a producer, sure.  Particularly for
> videobloggers, it's the easiest way.  But videobloggers are not really
> the point here in this Brightcove thing.
>
> People are finding and experimenting with other ways of making money
> through online video apart from advertising, and apart from Google/YT
> ads.  People interested in making money from independent production
> don't want to just be dependent on the crumbs that Google throw their
> way after they've plastered their content in keyword-targeted overlay
> ads.
>
> There are a lot of other things that producers, agencies, brands, etc
> are interested in - and from what I saw of the breakdown of the day
> it's not just a flog from Brightcove  - though sure, there'll be
> plenty of that - and *of course* you wouldn't expect them to be
> pimping Google in their description.
>
> For an unusually free day, though, the main benefits would seem to me
> to be the other people attending, who are usually the most interesting
> part of events like this, and Brightcove's own data about people's
> viewing habits & perspective on the future, and also the speakers from
> Ogilvy, Tubemogul, Freewheel & Quantcast - and the discussions cover
> things like:
> Mobile Advertising, Over-the-Top Distribution, Advertising in Live
> Events, Bringing TV Advertisers Online, Digital Ad serving Standards &
> Audience Measurement & Profiling.
> Especially given the profusion of IPTV Set Top Box, internet ready TV
> sets and portable devices like the iPad this year.
>
> Anyway, not perhaps a videoblogger thing, but I wouldn't say just a
> crock
>
> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
>
> On 2 May 2010, at 00:56, David Jones wrote:
>
> > On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Rupert Howe <rupert@...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > It's free?!
> > > If anybody here is going to this, would love to have a peek at their
> > > notes :)
> > > Rupert
> > > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> > It's a crock, they are just flogging their own stuff.
> > Notice no mention of the words Youtube or Adsense.
> > Making money from video blogs and other online content is easy, it's a
> > two step process:
> > 1) Google Adsense ads
> > 2) Youtube channel linked to Google Adsense.
> >
> > Anything else is almost guaranteed to be a waste of time and effort.
> >
> > Dave.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Isn't this where we started on this thread?
>
> j
>

Yes.

- verdi

--
Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society.
http://training.michaelverdi.com

Im confused, this subject isnt where the thread started at all, it started with
the rumours about Google opening up VP8. Most of the talk about downsides of
theora has been to do with quality, hardware decoding, quantity of videos
already in H.264. The potential for patent problems with theora are usually
dismissed because there havent been any issues with this so far. Jobs is
suggesting that there are about to be very real issues with this, and I consider
that a significant development.

Cheers

Steve Elbows

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@...> wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Isn't this where we started on this thread?
> >
> > j
> >
>
> Yes.
>
> - verdi
>
> --
> Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia & Lymphoma
Society.
> http://training.michaelverdi.com
>

What he was referring to was that a day (and 11 emails ago), Joly
noted a quote from the same story you just brought up and we all just
had a discussion about it.
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
>

> I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
> potential encumbrance.
>

I wouldn't put much stock in that FUD. Also, all of these arguments
don't (and can't really) take into account VP8 that Google is
preparing to open source. Give them a few months to put it out there
and let's see how good it is and who adopts it. Until then people are
just fighting last year's battle.

- Verdi

On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 12:33 PM, elbowsofdeath <steve@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Im confused, this subject isnt where the thread started at all, it started
with the rumours about Google opening up VP8. Most of the talk about downsides
of theora has been to do with quality, hardware decoding, quantity of videos
already in H.264. The potential for patent problems with theora are usually
dismissed because there havent been any issues with this so far. Jobs is
suggesting that there are about to be very real issues with this, and I consider
that a significant development.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve Elbows
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@...> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Isn't this where we started on this thread?
> > >
> > > j
> > >
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > - verdi
> >
> > --
> > Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia & Lymphoma
Society.
> > http://training.michaelverdi.com
> >
>
>


--
Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society.
http://training.michaelverdi.com

On 2 May 2010, at 14:28, elbowsofdeath wrote:

> Jobs cant really say much about VP8 until oogle make an official
> announcement about it can he?
>
Fair enough, I guess, though it seems a pretty open secret.  And
they've bought it, right?  So it's not irrelevant, and the possibility
should deserve some recognition in a full honest discussion?

> As for Quicktime,if we care about open standards then thank god
> Quicktime multimedia development hasnt gone anywhere,
>
Really? Ignore the possibilities it presented?  Just for the sake of
open standards?

> or we'd still be trapped in the 2004 battle between Apple &
> Microsoft for codec/plugin dominance.
>
Are we not still trapped in a newer version of the old battles?  Only
with Apple and MS aligned for h.264 use only and Mozilla for theora
only - with Google, Chrome & YT somewhere in between?

> HTML5 is the best hope on that front, regardless of which codec is
> used for the video & audio. There are already some basic tools in
> Adobe CS5 to enable some limited sorts of flash stuff to be turned
> into HTML5, and within a few years this stuff should explode in a
> vendor-neutral way, leaving the video codec as the only issue.
>
I really look forward to HTML5 being widely usable, when browser
compatibility and codec tolerance allows us to make video pages that
more than 50% of web users can see, but it would still be nice to be
able to easily make portable interactive networked video files that
aren't dependent on the HTML page they're sitting in.

> So clearly I disagree that Apple are the biggest offender when it
> comes to 'dumb video blackbox' stuff.
>
Why "so"?  Glad Adobe are building tools for the inevitable HTML5
transition, but surely Apple are the ones who had QT technology which
made video not dumb, and then ignored, starved & killed it?  I wonder
whether that makes them worse than people who never had that view of
video in the first place?

> As for FUD, lets be honest, there is plenty of FUD about H.264 too.
> There are legit issues for the future but its pretty telling that
> people who are against H.264 took little comfort when the H.264
> patent-pool managers pushed back any woe for years.
>
I agree - I think the discussion has revolved a lot around Jobs's
fudging of h.264 as 'open', and the difference he makes between that
and Theora in his short response to Hugo?

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv

>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe <rupert@...> wrote:
> >
> > In all Job's attacks on Flash, he didn't really talk about the
> > technical limitations of Flash video for animation/interactivity/
> media
> > synchronization - which is telling, since Apple systematically
> ignored
> > Quicktime development & interactive Quicktime for years - and have
> > basically just chopped Quicktime off at the knees. For 10 years
> > Quicktime has been able to handle things that Flash still can't do.
> >
> > If Jobs had made interactive Quicktime & Interactive Quicktime
> > development a priority 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago when video
> > was obviously about to happen in a big way, he might have avoided
> the
> > explosion in Flash video and the problems he's getting now, so he's
> > made his own bed AFAIC.
> >
> > And now come a bit late to the party to push a 3rd party patented
> > codec that's not a great deal more useful than Flash, and
> dependent on
> > HTML5 or Apps for interactivity.
> >
> > The ignoring and lack of development of Quicktime, one of their most
> > powerful technologies, is the biggest of the growing number of
> things
> > that (as a longtime Mac user) are making me dislike Apple more &
> more.
> >
> > On another list, Adrian Miles talked about his "frustration at
> > industry 'innovators' wanting to treat video as a dumb object and
> > devices for playback as blackboxes". Apple is the biggest culprit in
> > this.
> >
> > Re the theora patent pool thing - as Verdi noted, it's the usual
> > patent Fear Uncertainty & Doubt, with absolutely no idea of whether
> > there's any substance that would allow an action to be brought, let
> > alone won. It's the passive voice that I noticed - it's the present
> > continuous tense - *is being* rather than *has been* or *was
> being* -
> > - so it's something that's still underway, and presumably - since
> > theora is not new - has been going on for a while.
> >
> > And I find it quite telling that VP8 hasn't featured in Job's letter
> > or response. I hate the expression "elephant in the room" but
> really,
> > the fact that he can't even bring himself to mention it says to me
> > that it undermines his argument about H.264 v Flash, even though I
> > agree with most of his points about Flash.
> >
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2 May 2010, at 08:15, Joly MacFie wrote:
> >
> > > A fair point is made in the comments in that article, that it
> isn't
> > > worth the patent trolls time and money unless someone deep-
> pocketed
> > > like Apple gets involved, but then they coud well come out of the
> > > woodwork.
> > >
> > > Another comment does, however, note his use of the passive tense
> to
> > > describe this process.
> > >
> > > http://www.isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=789
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 12:56 AM, tom_a_sparks <tom_a_sparks@...
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> > I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
> > > >> > potential encumbrance.
> > > >> >
> > > >
> > > > the same comments were give about vorbis, where are the court
> cases?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> > > WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> > > http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> > > Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>



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

Ahh right. The difference is that in his original statement Jobs was only making
a point about potential theora patent woes, which quite rightly could be
dismissed as FUD. But in Jobs later email reply to the open letter, he actually
states that there is actually something going on with this, that patent-holders
are actually moving towards throwing a patent spanner at theora. I consider this
a significant development, though of course we have to wait until these
patent-holders make their move to be sure.

Cheers

Steve

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@...> wrote:
>
> What he was referring to was that a day (and 11 emails ago), Joly
> noted a quote from the same story you just brought up and we all just
> had a discussion about it.
> On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:
> >
>
> > I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
> > potential encumbrance.
> >
>
> I wouldn't put much stock in that FUD. Also, all of these arguments
> don't (and can't really) take into account VP8 that Google is
> preparing to open source. Give them a few months to put it out there
> and let's see how good it is and who adopts it. Until then people are
> just fighting last year's battle.
>
> - Verdi
>
> On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 12:33 PM, elbowsofdeath <steve@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Im confused, this subject isnt where the thread started at all, it started
with the rumours about Google opening up VP8. Most of the talk about downsides
of theora has been to do with quality, hardware decoding, quantity of videos
already in H.264. The potential for patent problems with theora are usually
dismissed because there havent been any issues with this so far. Jobs is
suggesting that there are about to be very real issues with this, and I consider
that a significant development.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Steve Elbows
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi <michael@> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Joly MacFie <joly@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Isn't this where we started on this thread?
> > > >
> > > > j
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes.
> > >
> > > - verdi
> > >
> > > --
> > > Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia & Lymphoma
Society.
> > > http://training.michaelverdi.com
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia & Lymphoma
Society.
> http://training.michaelverdi.com
>

Hi folks,
Since many of you have your own websites and such, I thought I would ask you all
to see if any of you have a good solution for selling digital downloads?  I am
looking for a one-time purchase option rather than a monthly fee arrangement. 
In the past I've used a plain old HTML system incorporating paypal, but now I
want to do digital downloads and they generally are 50 - 100 mbs in size - for
an audio documentary.  I have used DIGIVENDOR and works pretty well, but the
author is not keeping up with his tech support, and it's very difficult if you
don't have tech support to help when things go bad.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!  Thanks!
Milt Lee

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe <rupert@...> wrote:
>
> Fair enough, I guess, though it seems a pretty open secret.  And
> they've bought it, right?  So it's not irrelevant, and the possibility
> should deserve some recognition in a full honest discussion?

Yeah but I certainly wouldnt look to Jobs to provide a fully rounded & totally
honest discussion about all these things, and as the head of a major corp I dont
think he has the luxury of speculating as to what Google will do as much as we
do.
>
> > As for Quicktime,if we care about open standards then thank god
> > Quicktime multimedia development hasnt gone anywhere,
> >
> Really? Ignore the possibilities it presented?  Just for the sake of
> open standards?
>
> > or we'd still be trapped in the 2004 battle between Apple &
> > Microsoft for codec/plugin dominance.
> >
> Are we not still trapped in a newer version of the old battles?  Only
> with Apple and MS aligned for h.264 use only and Mozilla for theora
> only - with Google, Chrome & YT somewhere in between?

Its not quite as bad as the old battle. For a start the present battle has
practical workarounds which will do, at least until such a time as the H.264
patent pool people decide to try to extract money from people who can currently
use h.264 for free.

Flash was a practical workaround for the old battle, it wasnt perfect but it
overcame the absolute nightmare where we used to have to tell viewers to install
quicktime or whatever. So too flash provides a partial fix for browsers that
arent going to be supporting h.264 natively, albeit at the expense of full HTML5
takeup.

> I really look forward to HTML5 being widely usable, when browser
> compatibility and codec tolerance allows us to make video pages that
> more than 50% of web users can see, but it would still be nice to be
> able to easily make portable interactive networked video files that
> aren't dependent on the HTML page they're sitting in.
>

Sure, I would love to have such a thing, cant see it happening though. For such
a multimedia file to be fully portable it needs to work with a very wide range
of devices, and be authored with a wide range of tools. Modern web-based
standards stuff is the only thing on my radar that fits that bill, and Im just
very happy that we even have one option.

> > So clearly I disagree that Apple are the biggest offender when it
> > comes to 'dumb video blackbox' stuff.
> >
> Why "so"?  Glad Adobe are building tools for the inevitable HTML5
> transition, but surely Apple are the ones who had QT technology which
> made video not dumb, and then ignored, starved & killed it?  I wonder
> whether that makes them worse than people who never had that view of
> video in the first place?

The quicktime stuff wasnt very good, there were very few tools that made use of
it, and there were numerous commercial hurdles that would likely have prevented
it from appearing on mobile devices from the likes of Microsoft.

I will sing Apples praises because they didnt doggedly stick to .mov as the
container format of choice, they were sensible with webkit and with numerous
other advances in HTML & CSS which they gave to the web standards people instead
of just throwing in their proprietary cooking pot. They arent perfect, and some
of the HTML5 useage scenarios they are trying to promote right now, such as iADs
or album extras do not seem of much use to us, but I still believe that we will
gain from the by-products of this down the road.

Flash was in many ways more capable of interesting multimedia stuff than
Quicktime, but there were obviously some severe barriers to getting people to
use this stuff, such as the cost of the tools. Adobe are actually opening up
various parts of flash more than ever before, its open in some ways but in
others its still far too much under the control of one corp, and obviously
Apples 'no flash' stance on their trendy devices isnt helping, but then again
neither are Microsoft with silverlight.

I would be much happier if we had seen more experimentation and innovation on
the multimedia front, along with more discussions about it on this list than all
the tedious dumb-video format discussions Ive been obsessed with in the last 6
years, but its not only technology & commercial barriers that have prevented
this, Frankly, most of us havent actually got very far at even imagining what
this amazing multimedia and non-dumb video could actually mean. Its all a bit
abstract with very few real examples of what we actually mean or what else video
could be. The web in general is the closest thing we have to widespread
multimedia, and even then we dont have all that many ideas of what to do with
it.
>
> > As for FUD, lets be honest, there is plenty of FUD about H.264 too.
> > There are legit issues for the future but its pretty telling that
> > people who are against H.264 took little comfort when the H.264
> > patent-pool managers pushed back any woe for years.
> >
> I agree - I think the discussion has revolved a lot around Jobs's
> fudging of h.264 as 'open', and the difference he makes between that
> and Theora in his short response to Hugo?

Dont get me wrong, I would be a lot happier if there was a practical video
format that was totally free and open in every sense of the word. I would be
happier if humanity had a much saner approach to intellectual property. Jobs has
his own motivations for his stance that probably go beyond his stated
motivations, but unfortunately his points about patents and theora cannot be
dismissed as a result. H.264 is open in some ways and whilst there is some
uncertainty regarding future charging, we generally know what the downsides of
H.264 are, unlike Theora and possibly even VP8 because whilst those are open in
some broader senses, they may fall foul of future patent battles. There is
enough at stake now, and enough money sloshing around the world of online video
that all sorts of interests may come out of the woodwork, and crush some of our
hopes in the process.

Cheers

Steve

> Rupert
> http://twittervlog.tv
>

Just trying to extract the interesting topic of multimedia from the video format
discussion.

I dont really know whee to start, Ive always been interested in it, although as
mentioned previously I get a bit lost when I actually try to flesh out some
vague ideas into something more solid and useful.

We've seen some, albeit fairly limited, attempts from the big video services to
add stuff to video, in terms of being able to insert links or annotation to
certain objects shown within a video. But even discounting the tech limitations,
Im left not quite sure how useful this stuff usually is, is it worth the effort?
Sometimes it really feels like its getting in the way, maybe a lot of the time I
really just want to consume video in linear fashion and keep interactivity and
communication for another part of the site.

Looking ahead I wonder how much video might get mixed in with online gaming &
3D. I know that some years ago some people experimented with video in Second
Life but it seemed a bit like that stuff ended up as a bit of a fad?

Are all the various ways that people can share different media on the web
providing a good foundation and all we need is a nicer way of presenting and
interacting with this stuff? I still daydream about better ways to mix
microblogging, photos, video & music & conversations together on the web, but
actual concrete ideas about how to do this seem to evade me.

Cheers

Steve

Whatever happened to SMIL? :)

On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 4:06 PM, elbowsofdeath <steve@...> wrote:

> Just trying to extract the interesting topic of multimedia from the video
> format discussion.
>
> I dont really know whee to start, Ive always been interested in it,
> although as mentioned previously I get a bit lost when I actually try to
> flesh out some vague ideas into something more solid and useful.
>
> We've seen some, albeit fairly limited, attempts from the big video
> services to add stuff to video, in terms of being able to insert links or
> annotation to certain objects shown within a video. But even discounting the
> tech limitations, Im left not quite sure how useful this stuff usually is,
> is it worth the effort? Sometimes it really feels like its getting in the
> way, maybe a lot of the time I really just want to consume video in linear
> fashion and keep interactivity and communication for another part of the
> site.
>
> Looking ahead I wonder how much video might get mixed in with online gaming
> & 3D. I know that some years ago some people experimented with video in
> Second Life but it seemed a bit like that stuff ended up as a bit of a fad?
>
> Are all the various ways that people can share different media on the web
> providing a good foundation and all we need is a nicer way of presenting and
> interacting with this stuff? I still daydream about better ways to mix
> microblogging, photos, video & music & conversations together on the web,
> but actual concrete ideas about how to do this seem to evade me.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
  Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
---------------------------------------------------------------


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

On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 1:53 AM, daredolls <daredoll@...> wrote:
>
> heck, i'd pay somebody to go for me, or, to be specific, i'd give a piece of
any action to one who helps arrange it.
>
> i would love to take the easy path, google adsense and youtube, but, as has
happened over and over in the history of the small screen, edgy material gets
pushed aside and has to find the new paths.

Can you please explain?
I get the impression you were somehow forced out of using Google
Adsense and Youtube?

Dave.

By the time h.264 patents are an issue again, there will be another codec
that trounces everything we're talking about, and it may or may not be open
source. Five years is a very very very long time in this field. We may not
even be using web browsers as we know them today, or HTML at all by then,
and video may be something very different as well. Apple might not be in
business, or they might be the new Evil Empire after a merger with Google
and Fox for all we know. Sarah Palin might get elected and help usher in
some misguided "porn tax" on ALL internet video that funds what's left of
infrastructure after all she murders all other sources of public funding.
NO. ONE. KNOWS.

For me, I'm sticking with h.264 as my main codec when the image will hold up
(for my stuff, sometimes it doesn't, and I have to serve a zipped photo jpeg
or just not put it online), and I will provide a theora version for work
that doesn't have much motion detail in it.

But at this point, for what I do, I'm not impressed with the performance of
full res video at 24p/30p in either HTML5 OR Flash contexts. The players for
both are universally ugly, distracting from the image, and unintuitive,
though youtube's redesigned players are at least a step in the right
direction (the HTML5 one looks almost inoffensive. now if only it would play
without crashing safari. but I know, beta, blah blah blah).

Let's make our art (or entertainment or whatever) and use what's available
at the time in the best way we can. There isn't, and there never will be, a
permanent, universal, trouble-free solution. And given how far we have to
go, there shouldn't be at this point.

I'm going to make art and try to keep a nice 95/5 balance favoring that over
obsessing about technology that is at best ephemeral and doomed to be
replaced/reframed/etc. before anyone can really do much about it. Not saying
the 5% doesn't matter: it does. But without the 95, it doesn't.

Two crabby cents,

Brook








On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 12:23 PM, elbowsofdeath <steve@...> wrote:

>
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>,
> Rupert Howe <rupert@...> wrote:
> >
> > Fair enough, I guess, though it seems a pretty open secret. And
> > they've bought it, right? So it's not irrelevant, and the possibility
> > should deserve some recognition in a full honest discussion?
>
> Yeah but I certainly wouldnt look to Jobs to provide a fully rounded &
> totally honest discussion about all these things, and as the head of a major
> corp I dont think he has the luxury of speculating as to what Google will do
> as much as we do.
> >
> > > As for Quicktime,if we care about open standards then thank god
> > > Quicktime multimedia development hasnt gone anywhere,
> > >
> > Really? Ignore the possibilities it presented? Just for the sake of
> > open standards?
> >
> > > or we'd still be trapped in the 2004 battle between Apple &
> > > Microsoft for codec/plugin dominance.
> > >
> > Are we not still trapped in a newer version of the old battles? Only
> > with Apple and MS aligned for h.264 use only and Mozilla for theora
> > only - with Google, Chrome & YT somewhere in between?
>
> Its not quite as bad as the old battle. For a start the present battle has
> practical workarounds which will do, at least until such a time as the H.264
> patent pool people decide to try to extract money from people who can
> currently use h.264 for free.
>
> Flash was a practical workaround for the old battle, it wasnt perfect but
> it overcame the absolute nightmare where we used to have to tell viewers to
> install quicktime or whatever. So too flash provides a partial fix for
> browsers that arent going to be supporting h.264 natively, albeit at the
> expense of full HTML5 takeup.
>
>
> > I really look forward to HTML5 being widely usable, when browser
> > compatibility and codec tolerance allows us to make video pages that
> > more than 50% of web users can see, but it would still be nice to be
> > able to easily make portable interactive networked video files that
> > aren't dependent on the HTML page they're sitting in.
> >
>
> Sure, I would love to have such a thing, cant see it happening though. For
> such a multimedia file to be fully portable it needs to work with a very
> wide range of devices, and be authored with a wide range of tools. Modern
> web-based standards stuff is the only thing on my radar that fits that bill,
> and Im just very happy that we even have one option.
>
>
> > > So clearly I disagree that Apple are the biggest offender when it
> > > comes to 'dumb video blackbox' stuff.
> > >
> > Why "so"? Glad Adobe are building tools for the inevitable HTML5
> > transition, but surely Apple are the ones who had QT technology which
> > made video not dumb, and then ignored, starved & killed it? I wonder
> > whether that makes them worse than people who never had that view of
> > video in the first place?
>
> The quicktime stuff wasnt very good, there were very few tools that made
> use of it, and there were numerous commercial hurdles that would likely have
> prevented it from appearing on mobile devices from the likes of Microsoft.
>
> I will sing Apples praises because they didnt doggedly stick to .mov as the
> container format of choice, they were sensible with webkit and with numerous
> other advances in HTML & CSS which they gave to the web standards people
> instead of just throwing in their proprietary cooking pot. They arent
> perfect, and some of the HTML5 useage scenarios they are trying to promote
> right now, such as iADs or album extras do not seem of much use to us, but I
> still believe that we will gain from the by-products of this down the road.
>
> Flash was in many ways more capable of interesting multimedia stuff than
> Quicktime, but there were obviously some severe barriers to getting people
> to use this stuff, such as the cost of the tools. Adobe are actually opening
> up various parts of flash more than ever before, its open in some ways but
> in others its still far too much under the control of one corp, and
> obviously Apples 'no flash' stance on their trendy devices isnt helping, but
> then again neither are Microsoft with silverlight.
>
> I would be much happier if we had seen more experimentation and innovation
> on the multimedia front, along with more discussions about it on this list
> than all the tedious dumb-video format discussions Ive been obsessed with in
> the last 6 years, but its not only technology & commercial barriers that
> have prevented this, Frankly, most of us havent actually got very far at
> even imagining what this amazing multimedia and non-dumb video could
> actually mean. Its all a bit abstract with very few real examples of what we
> actually mean or what else video could be. The web in general is the closest
> thing we have to widespread multimedia, and even then we dont have all that
> many ideas of what to do with it.
>
> >
> > > As for FUD, lets be honest, there is plenty of FUD about H.264 too.
> > > There are legit issues for the future but its pretty telling that
> > > people who are against H.264 took little comfort when the H.264
> > > patent-pool managers pushed back any woe for years.
> > >
> > I agree - I think the discussion has revolved a lot around Jobs's
> > fudging of h.264 as 'open', and the difference he makes between that
> > and Theora in his short response to Hugo?
>
> Dont get me wrong, I would be a lot happier if there was a practical video
> format that was totally free and open in every sense of the word. I would be
> happier if humanity had a much saner approach to intellectual property. Jobs
> has his own motivations for his stance that probably go beyond his stated
> motivations, but unfortunately his points about patents and theora cannot be
> dismissed as a result. H.264 is open in some ways and whilst there is some
> uncertainty regarding future charging, we generally know what the downsides
> of H.264 are, unlike Theora and possibly even VP8 because whilst those are
> open in some broader senses, they may fall foul of future patent battles.
> There is enough at stake now, and enough money sloshing around the world of
> online video that all sorts of interests may come out of the woodwork, and
> crush some of our hopes in the process.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
>
> > Rupert
> > http://twittervlog.tv
> >
>
>
>



--
_______________________________________________________
Brook Hinton
film/video/audio art
www.brookhinton.com
studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab


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

Adobe started using SMIL a bit a few years ago with their Adobe Media
Player.
Was good to see it being used in a big project.  It usually is behind the
scenes on phones (MMS) and some television programming systems.

http://www.adobe.com/devnet/mediaplayer/articles/amp_cdk_pt08.html

Moving forward, html5 and CSS will suffice.

Sull

On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Joly MacFie <joly@...> wrote:

>
>
> Whatever happened to SMIL? :)
>
>
> On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 4:06 PM, elbowsofdeath
<steve@...<steve%40dvmachine.com>>
> wrote:
>
> > Just trying to extract the interesting topic of multimedia from the video
> > format discussion.
> >
> > I dont really know whee to start, Ive always been interested in it,
> > although as mentioned previously I get a bit lost when I actually try to
> > flesh out some vague ideas into something more solid and useful.
> >
> > We've seen some, albeit fairly limited, attempts from the big video
> > services to add stuff to video, in terms of being able to insert links or
> > annotation to certain objects shown within a video. But even discounting
> the
> > tech limitations, Im left not quite sure how useful this stuff usually
> is,
> > is it worth the effort? Sometimes it really feels like its getting in the
> > way, maybe a lot of the time I really just want to consume video in
> linear
> > fashion and keep interactivity and communication for another part of the
> > site.
> >
> > Looking ahead I wonder how much video might get mixed in with online
> gaming
> > & 3D. I know that some years ago some people experimented with video in
> > Second Life but it seemed a bit like that stuff ended up as a bit of a
> fad?
> >
> > Are all the various ways that people can share different media on the web
> > providing a good foundation and all we need is a nicer way of presenting
> and
> > interacting with this stuff? I still daydream about better ways to mix
> > microblogging, photos, video & music & conversations together on the web,
> > but actual concrete ideas about how to do this seem to evade me.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
> http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
> Secretary - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


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

Might as well just focus on HTML5 and CSS3 and Javascript and cutting edge
Web Browsers (Webkit, Gecko).

The web page should be considered the viable multimedia canvas of the
future.  Continued advancements in web browser capabilities will lead to
multimedia that we normally see with Flash or even Quicktime can be
referenced.

Speaking of web browsers... it's prob worth mentioning the forthcoming
competition..... RockMelt.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/170243/rockmelt_101_a_quick_guide_to_the_mysterio\
us_browser.html

Sull

On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 4:06 PM, elbowsofdeath <steve@...> wrote:

>
>
> Just trying to extract the interesting topic of multimedia from the video
> format discussion.
>
> I dont really know whee to start, Ive always been interested in it,
> although as mentioned previously I get a bit lost when I actually try to
> flesh out some vague ideas into something more solid and useful.
>
> We've seen some, albeit fairly limited, attempts from the big video
> services to add stuff to video, in terms of being able to insert links or
> annotation to certain objects shown within a video. But even discounting the
> tech limitations, Im left not quite sure how useful this stuff usually is,
> is it worth the effort? Sometimes it really feels like its getting in the
> way, maybe a lot of the time I really just want to consume video in linear
> fashion and keep interactivity and communication for another part of the
> site.
>
> Looking ahead I wonder how much video might get mixed in with online gaming
> & 3D. I know that some years ago some people experimented with video in
> Second Life but it seemed a bit like that stuff ended up as a bit of a fad?
>
> Are all the various ways that people can share different media on the web
> providing a good foundation and all we need is a nicer way of presenting and
> interacting with this stuff? I still daydream about better ways to mix
> microblogging, photos, video & music & conversations together on the web,
> but actual concrete ideas about how to do this seem to evade me.
>
> Cheers
>
> Steve
>
>
>


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