Home > All Posts > Sort by Author
Adrian Miles

Re: [videoblogging] what we're trying to do….

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
June 26, 2004 | Post #150 | Topic #110

On 26/06/2004, at 10:11 AM, Jay Dedman wrote: > so you'd put the phone(ability to connect to the internet) in the > camera... > instead of the camera in the phone... > who do we need to convince that this is a good idea? > I think our continuing developing of the process AND creating examples > of > work is the key... > people can SEE how cool it is... patience, with ubiquitous wireless there will be a myriad of intergrated and new objects. the problem is *not* to do existing practice with this but invent new practices (like blogs are a new genre...) cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Re: videoblogging from a i-mode phone

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
June 26, 2004 | Post #147 | Topic #108

On 26/06/2004, at 6:10 PM, Andreas Haugstrup wrote: > The cheap phones are also huge and I can't justify spending so much > on > one of the smaller models so I haven't tried it out myself. I've > played with a couple of the phones though. No editing directly on the > phone. I think that stuff requires a lot of computer power.. generally big and ugly :-) keep in mind too that it is expensive. as you upload video from your phone you pay *much much* more per byte than sticking it on your webserver via ftp etc. In australia i think it is around AUD1.50 per video (USD.75). Not a lot but 2 a day adds up! cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Re: (unknown)

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
June 27, 2004 | Post #176 | Topic #71

On 22/06/2004, at 4:19 AM, Andreas Haugstrup wrote: > Regarding the poster movies: I can't seem to play them :o( > When I open any of Adrian's movies in QT I just get the poster - the > normal Play/Forward/Rewind buttons aren't in the player. If I click > the image it's like the cursor flickers between a normal arrow and > the > hand that designates hyperlinks. Nothing happens though. > > I'm running my browser without plugins because I don't like things > like videos playing without me saying so. Thus I'm downloading all > files to my harddrive before playing. the qt plugin is what drives the video. you can't get the video without the poster movie loading the real movie, though once you've got the real video you can sometimes download them. but most of my work uses child movies so you can't download the video. i've got a discussion of child movies on my blog. visit http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog and search on child movies (or childmovies can't remember). there are cross platform issues in my work. but at this point in what *i* do i treat it as experimental and not about access. however, if you've got a full install of qt 6 they should play. but you do have to mouse into the loaded movies for them to 'work'. most of the work is *not* sit back and let it play. cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] It's quite an effort to put together a video every day.

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
June 27, 2004 | Post #177 | Topic #81

On 23/06/2004, at 8:50 PM, Steve Garfield wrote: > I'm going to look into a new process that includes making a poster > movie in QuickTime and only loading the video when the used clicks the > poster movie. That'll reduce my steps by taking out the HTML page > creation step. i'd also buy ecto since that will upload your quicktime, pull out a poster frame (I think) and write all the html for you. i think it will talk to typepad. certainly talks to movable type. cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]



Re: [videoblogging] formats

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
June 30, 2004 | Post #220 | Topic #140

On 27/06/2004, at 5:16 AM, Lucas Gonze wrote: > There are four, WMV, mpeg, Real and mov. The three proprietary formats > have limited support outside of their dedicated rendering tools, WMP > for > WMV, Real for Real, QuickTime for mov. mpeg is supported by all video > renderers as far as I know. Quicktime is not actually a file format but a file architecture that allows the playing back of formats. the difference is significant (for eg i can play back some avi's inside of a quicktime movie, and qt 6 fully supports flash 5 files). > > I don't know enough to compare video quality and compression. at the technical level signficant, at the domestic level it's PAL versus Beta. One is better but in most contexts and with most people's skill and knowledge the differences become minor. Ben Waggoner has a book on video compression, that's where you go if you want to find the nitty gritty stuff. > > Open standards are a very good thing for bloggish collaboration. My > guess > is that mpeg video is more likely to be watched than any of the other > formats, and more likely to lead to a healthy collaborative > environment. mpeg 4 is probably best. mpeg 1 and 2 are not for networked environments. Keep in mind that i *think* window's version of mpeg 4 (which is an open standard) does not conform. >... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] formats

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
June 30, 2004 | Post #221 | Topic #140

On 27/06/2004, at 11:49 AM, Jay Dedman wrote: > > Forinstance, i use and Mac with imovie/FCP and quicktime. > Peter uses a PC with Vegas video. i think he compresses into quicktime. > i bet everyone in Videoblog week used a somewhat different process to > create > their entries. this is minor. we use word, quark, pagemaker, indesign to get onto paper for a pamphlet. the important bit for us is the pamphlet end of the chain. i think mpeg 4 works best, whether that is quicktime built or otherwise. keep in mind that qt is an architecture not a format which makes it very very flexible and creative, but yes, it is closed. then again if you can code java you can write a quicktime applicaiton to do whatever you want, full java apis are available. cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]



Re: [videoblogging] formats

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #234 | Topic #140

On 28/06/2004, at 12:01 AM, PeterV wrote: >> On that video I didn't put in credits, so no one is going to >> be able to >> link back to me. That's a problem and a lesson. > > One thing I can do in the next version of that SMIl file is include > links :) sorry everyone, playing catch up with email here (with deep vein thrombosis courtesy of the long haul flight and actually sleeping Melbourne - Singapore). What I'm hoping to do is make a movie that, like Peter's SMIL work, will allow the loading of various people's video blogs. Will probably do one for each day. The idea would be that they can load if requested (so everyones will be located in a child movie list inside the movie i make) but also if you click on them or similar (haven't figured it out yet) can retrieve the vog in a browser window at the specified url. This means the blogs can be displayed, but also you can use the same video interface to view the actual entry via html. cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]



Re: [videoblogging] formats

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #233 | Topic #140

On 28/06/2004, at 12:07 AM, PeterV wrote: > Back to the formats discussion, I don't really understand how it all > fits together. Know of a good introduction somewhere I can read? MPEG 4 is based on the QuickTime architecture. It isn't qt, but they took the qt ideas of architecture to use in MPEG4. MPEG 4 is an international consortium that more or less has agreed and open standards. Anyone can make a mpeg 4 compliant player, encoder, etc. I think *that's think* that there are licensing fees involved. QuickTime is a media architecture that other stuff gets loaded into that can then be presented/played. This is why people write specific plugins for qt that let you do clever things like vector graphic things, and whatnot. Real and WMV are more like 'dumb' formats in that (here i really need to be watched, i've only done my serious work in QuickTime so don't know much anymore about Real and WMV) they are primarily presentation engines. QT is an authoring environment as well as a presentation environment (if you like it is more like html). Nearly everyone even if they publish to WMV or Real, use QuickTime in their production chain. At the end they then export to WMV or Real. You can use SMIL to do nifty stuff, but keep in mind SMIL is like HTML for multimedia, it still isn't about 'interactivity'. And it still has a very... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] formats

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #237 | Topic #140

On 28/06/2004, at 12:43 AM, Steve Garfield wrote: > I'm concerned about the precedent of deep linking to all the videos, > out of context from their original pages. > > That means anyone could grab my videos, use my bandwidth, and display > my video. > > Maybe we should create a highlight reel that shows clips of everyones > video? this is an issue, and one that applies to blogs in general but that video makies very visible. the web is an odd medium - the more successful you are the more expensive it gets for the successful individual. Yes, all movies have a url and anyone can then load that url into their own webpage, and the traffic you pay for. This is the case for all movies online but: there are tricks around this. the best one (which does not prevent specific hijacking) is to embed a poster movie on your web page. Now a poster movie can have the href tag in side the embed tag, so anyone can read the source code and find the full file. However, if you embed the href inside of the postermovie, then it is not readable in the source code of the page, it is literally embedded into the poster movie (the .mov) itself and Quicktime can read it from there. I do this is in Livestage pro, i used to use a free tool from Apple that... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] formats

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #235 | Topic #140

On 28/06/2004, at 12:53 AM, PeterV wrote: > Yes, it's an interesting problem... As far as I know there's no way to > add metadata wether to allow or disalow linking. I do think linking is > crucial to the net (even deeplinking), but I understand the bandwidth > concern... You can of course dissallow linking with an htaccess file. so my other email, there is metadata that you can add that can prevent this. the simplest way is to script a movie to test against the url of the requesting page and to refuse requests from pages that don't match a specific text string. > >> Maybe we should create a highlight reel that shows clips of >> everyones >> video? > > If you create highlights-for-linking I will of course link to those > instead. Maybe this could work: on the same page you have your video, > have a message saying wether you allow deep linking, and optionally > provide a highlights video to link to instead... Just thinking... i'd suggest that linking to and from video is integral to vogging as a mature form. via rtsp this would be easier as you could serve 1'30" to 1'33" from a clip. with http streaming you can't do this (well you can via http but that's only with mirrors, it will still serve the first 1'30" just not show it). this means you will pay for it, but... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] formats

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #239 | Topic #140

On 28/06/2004, at 1:06 AM, David Wolf wrote: > As a possible solution to the bandwidth issue, how about using RSS or > some other flavour of XML (hey, just another SMIL file would work > well!) to organise which files you do and don't want linked to by > everyone else. Say a "recent" database of recently created pieces or > an "excerpts" database with much smaller preview videos. We could all > link to these files in the same way that we subscribe to RSS feeds > from weblogs or news services. The actual larger files could be > linked from these in the same way as "click to continue" or "read > more" works with text. > > Doesn't need to be too high tech, we can copy a lot from the way > weblogs work :-) I was thinking of the same thing. you could write a custom rss feed for the quicktime and then have an aggregation page that loads these rss feeds. should be pretty straight forward, another thing i'd like to have a go it if someone hasn't done it already. cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]



Re: [videoblogging] deeplinking considered n/a

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #231 | Topic #140

On 28/06/2004, at 2:18 AM, Lucas Gonze wrote: > In the context of web audio/video, the concept of > deep linking is not applicable. > might have the wrong end of the stick here. but deep linking is applicable in the context of video blogs because (for eg) i might want to link/use video from an older post that is buried in your archive. cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]



Re: [videoblogging] deep linking #2

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #230 | Topic #140

On 28/06/2004, at 2:29 AM, Lucas Gonze wrote: > I don't understand. Why are you hosting videos if you don't want > people > to watch them? > > That said, what you should do is constantly change your video URLs, so > that stored links to them become invalid. It is still easy to extract > the > URLs and use them in e.g. SMIL, but it will not be possible for them to > become popular, so you will prevent the bulk of linking. as i mentioned previously, there are reasonably robust ways of doing this. if people want more so say and i'll write a more detailed description cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]



Re: [videoblogging] what we're trying to do….

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #240 | Topic #110

On 28/06/2004, at 1:51 AM, Jay Dedman wrote: >> patience, with ubiquitous wireless there will be a myriad of >> intergrated and new objects. the problem is *not* to do existing >> practice with this but invent new practices (like blogs are a new >> genre...) > > can you explain? > you mean NOT do videoblogs..but something else? > ive researched online and see that people have been put video in their > blogs > since the beginning of 2003. well, i've been putting video into blogs since 2001, but have spent most of my time working out what that should be like rather than putting a lot of video into there. a videoblog should not be just video in a blog, but should be video which has some of the properties or qualities of blogging. quotation, internal and external linking, and so on. the discussion here about rss, for example, is a beginning. but once you've got wireless everywhere then you could put a video feed into whatever you like. wearables, your car, your bicycle, a book cover. video in these contexts will no longer be 'video'. much like writing in a blog isn't a 'journal' - simply live blogging a conference demonstrates how blog writing is not journal writing! we don't know what these things will be, but they will be different. > very kind of limited. > but it's not normal yet. > there's no conversations... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] deeplinking considered n/a

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #232 | Topic #140

On 28/06/2004, at 4:59 AM, Ryan Shaw wrote: > As we've mentioned, there are two issues at work here: bandwidth and > context. The first is a technical issue, probably best addressed by > things like freecache.org or bittorrent. > > The second is perhaps more interesting. People want to control the > context within which their work is seen. At a fundamental level this > means proper accreditation--if I put your photos on my website it > implies that I took those photos, unless I specifically mention > otherwise. good points made here Ryan. > > It gets more complex that that, though. An image or a video shot, > unlike > a blog post or a news article, has no intrinsic meaning. These forms > of expression get their meaning from the context in which they are > presented. In film this phenomenon is known as the Kuleshov effect[1]. > On the web, the possibilities for recontextualization are endless, and > it is this fact, the fact that I can totally change the meaning of your > work and that you are powerless to stop me, that leads to kind of > anti-deep linking sentiment that Lucas finds so silly. wearing my academic hat i wrote about this as a general condition of hypertext (cinematic paradigms of hypertext) a few years ago. it is a condition of these environments (actually it's a condition of all discursive environments, just... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Re: deeplinking considered n/a

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #238 | Topic #140

On 28/06/2004, at 5:30 AM, Andreas Haugstrup wrote: > This is different from deeplinking directly to a movie file. In my > world, anyway. > Movies aren't hypertexts. The movies we're making now aren't > hypermedia either. They are dead ends on the world wide web and as > you > say: Alone they have no context. another good point, but one that suggests our movies should change, not our deep linking practices. eg, any of my vogs, click the question mark in the lower right of screen and it will load a web page. *Every* movie should link to another object, there should not be a dead end. > > The context is provided in the videoblog entry. The HTML page that > describes the video and either displays a video window or has a link > to the video file. yep, though you can include it in the movie too if you wish. in my case i have one blog which is only video, another blog which offers commentary. the link in the video goes to the commentary page. i ahve put textin movies before, but they just end up too much as closed objects. > > So when I create a video entry what I'm saying is. Here's a work I > created: It's a videoblog entry consisting of some hypertext (HTML) > *and* an embedded video. Then normal copyright laws applies: > Distributing another's work without... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Re: creating a standard

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #229 | Topic #140

On 30/06/2004, at 6:53 AM, Eric Rice wrote: > For streaming, it's a different story. Part of me sees videoblogging > as a streaming, short > term content model, not unlike audioblogging or regular weblogging. > With streaming, the > options are endless. I know people use Quicktime across many platforms > and since I have > a spare OS X server laying around, I'll probably just deal with > quicktime if I need to stream > content (portable or disposable or otherwise). That may change though > in the near future, > I don't know yet. for rtsp quicktime rools :-) because it's free. see what real charge for a server that can support 20 simultaneous streams, what hardware it needs, then run quicktime streaming server on a linux box for approximately $0.00 in software costs. cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]



Re: [videoblogging] MPEG-4 (was: deeplinking considered n/a)

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #228 | Topic #140

On 30/06/2004, at 4:54 AM, Ryan Shaw wrote: >> Do you mean mpeg1 or 4? Mpeg1 is too bandwidth inefficient, mpeg4 is >> not in wide enough use and does not look like it will be for a couple >> years, if ever. Encoders are costly and users are not switching >> quickly >> from WMV and Sorenson. Mpeg4's promise was that it could be the mp3 >> of >> video, I think WMV is likely to prevent that from happening. > > I think you're dismissing MPEG-4 too quickly. XviD > (http://www.xvid.org) > is an ISO MPEG-4 compliant video codec that is free and open source. I > think we're likely to see more open-source MPEG-4 codecs in the future. > Moreover new media appliances like videophones, tapeless camcorders and > portable video players are standardizing on MPEG-4, not WMV, as the > format of choice. > > It make take a while for professional media producers to make the > switch, but I don't expect videobloggers to necessarily be pros. > > I agree that the consumer is poorly served by the current bewildering > array of competing formats. But at least an open standard exists and > seems to be catching on. licence QuickTime player to get the Pro version (around USD25.00) and you can export compliant MPEG4 in QuickTime. Dirt cheap, very effective and for the dollar of significant quality. It also lets you export to... [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Re: deeplinking considered n/a

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #236 | Topic #140

On 30/06/2004, at 3:00 AM, petertheman wrote: > You *can* add text in Quicktime SMIL movies. I had it working but it > looked kinda bad, so I'm not sure how far Quicktime's support for text > goes... text in quicktime is text. ie it is stored as plain text ascii and so displays differently on mac and pc and if you specify gill sans and the client doesn't have it, then it will use something else. if you want credits, then do credits and burn them into the film itself. why does qt do this? 1. text tracks are editable by clients. (yes, really) 2. they're searchable by clients since they are text 3. they are incrediably lightweight (sicne they're just text files) 4. they can be manipulated since they aren't 'burnt' into the video in the way that credits work so you can make them shrink, grow, scroll, not scroll etc. i have a lot of vogs from a few years ago that used multiple text tracks to make 'snow' text movies :-) there are some scripts you can use in things like livestage to control fonts in text tracks on the basis of platform. cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]



Re: [videoblogging] Videoblog definition

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
July 1, 2004 | Post #227 | Topic #187

On 29/06/2004, at 2:13 AM, Yaron Samid wrote: > Is there a definition of 'what a videoblog is' that we all or mostly > agree on? no but i wrote a manifesto once when i tried to kick start the revolution that Jay and co did kick start this week: http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/manifesto/ cheers Adrian Miles ................................................................. hypertext.rmit || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/adrian interactive networked video || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog research blog || hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/ [View]