Home > All Posts > Individual Post
Post #14

Re: BloggerVision

By Yaron Samid | "Yaron Samid" <yaron@...> | yaron_samid
June 15, 2004 | Post #14 | Topic #12

Great question and point Adrian, and thanks for playing devils advocate, the most important part of innovating a new idea/product is having people smarter then you shoot holes in it until its actually worth something. Quality of service, namely picture quality (resolution and screen size) is important to mainstream viewer adoption. Its been proven time and again in the media world. Cable TV killed that antenna on top of your old TV set because of picture quality, not because of the 100 channels you never watch. You'll be switching to and paying extra for HDTV soon to. That being said, I've always felt the plumbing is only worth the shit it delivers. Picture quality or not, you're 100% correct, content is THE main driver of viewership and always will be. I would think picture quality is relevant for video bloggers as well, whether they shoot a 15 second "life moment" or 5 minute short movie -- you put in the time to produce the content, isn't it a shame to have it seen in a choppy 200X100 window? Before you answer that, let me just say that it is entirely up to you. Our goal is not to enforce any production value standards on video bloggers, just to facilitate the publishing and distribution of their video files, regardless of its size. The key value to video bloggers is that its an free and easy way to publish video online. If they still want to create small, low-res files, that's completely up to them. Low quality encoding standards are actually imposed on people by the bandwith/costs limitations of streaming. Sticking to that standard with our technology would be like driving a porsche in 1st gear, but to each his own. This is really not about picture quality for the publishers but I'm glad you brought it up. How important do you think it is for video bloggers to have thier clips seen by many people? Is it a small community thing or are we striving for mainstream viewership? --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@r...> wrote: > > On 15/06/2004, at 4:07 PM, Yaron Samid wrote: > > > I'm an entrepreneur in NYC that has recently secured funding for my > > broadband media startup. Our product/network will enable anyone to > > broadcast DVD quality video over the Internet to an unlimited number > > of viewers at no cost. I'm particularly passionate about helping > > video bloggers and independent content producers to get their visual > > stories to the world by entirely bypassing the bureaucracy of > > traditional offline distribution channels and the technical, quality > > and cost limitations of streaming video online. > > hi Yaron > > ok, I'm regularly going to play devil's advocate here, ok? largely in > the spirit of pushing ideas and making things better. > > so, front up question. What's the big deal about DVD quality material? > Lots of things work not because they are high rez but because their > content works, or the content model works. (SMS, early html, early > cinema, early radio spring to mind.) > I'm not sure if it is a relevant analogy, but on my desktop i want > small video works, not monuments. I want monuments I'll go to the > cinema. At a major end of the spectrum it isn't about the production > values in this sense. In the same way I guess that blogs aren't books, > and don't try to be. > > What empowers more is a tool that makes it easy to make, much like a > pencil and sketchpad. We don't need galleries to present our work yet, > we need the sketchpads. > > 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/