Home > All Posts > Individual Post
Post #1826

Re: [videoblogging] Uniqueness of Video Blogging

By Adrian Miles | Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@...> | adrianlmiles
November 18, 2004 | Post #1826 | Topic #1809

On 18/11/2004, at 6:18 AM, Ed Yarrish wrote: > -- video blogging (in the context of the blog page, not the small > video box) combines text, graphics, sound and moving images, to make > it a unique, personally controlled medium. well that's only half of it. It *should* be "video that combines text, graphics, sound and moving images" all in the video itself. > > -- it potentially allows each of these mechanisms to be used together > so that the most appropriate one can be used for a specific > communication's element, for example, a Web site link works best in > text nonsense. Why do web sites use graphics as navigation devices then? :-) You can text links inside video, you can have embedded links (all or part of the video) that also take you somewhere else. All the vogs I made last year had a question makr in them, clicking that loaded a url. This was graphic, but it was inside the video. But you could just as easily have someone say "Like Ed said yesterday" and clicking then would take you to Ed's entry (or video) from yesterday... > while a graphic might give an image of the web page or a video > image might convey the emotions and commitments behind an idea, while > a text transcript might be more easily shared and passed on by the > viewer/reader. (The bias in this discussion is definitely video, with > little commentary yet about the relationship of the other elements to > the video [e.g. the paragraph next to the video link that convinces > you in 10 seconds that it is worth investing one to three minutes to > see the video], but with some attempts to include elements such as > active links actually in the video itself.) > > -- video blog's seem to work best when they are short, one to three > minutes. This seems to be influenced by three factors, the mechanics > to produce and edit a video clip, the expense of bandwidth and the > blog medium which has primarily been short, newsy items. it is about granularity. think of a diamond and its facets. Each facet is a face onto the world, the more faces, then the more opportunity there is to comment, annotate, link to, discuss, engage with. Once it gets too big this doesn't work because any other response has to then acknowledge/deal with all the other bits. so yes, small is better. A vog on doing the dishes, plus a vog on brushing your teeth, plus a vog on your pyjamas. this is much better than one vog on 'your evening...' :-) > > -- video blogging with its newest item on top format seems biased > toward new, and newsy, item prominence versus (if there were such a > thing) a video Wiki might be biased more toward the accumulation of > knowledge. perhaps separating out knowledge here might be useful. wiki: fragments, easy to add new sections, structure generated in the act of authoring. These are the most important aspects. so video wiki would need to pick this up too. therefore: 1. you need to be able to easily cite/link to videos 2. you need to be able to link from parts of videos (time based links but also parts of an image - clicking on my face may lead to somewhere other than if you click on the bookshelf behind me). why? because in a wiki entry there are numerous links out and in, they can occur anywhere in the text. > > -- blogging in most cases appears as a personal, journal type medium, > but a variety of group, or community, elements seem to have emerged as > secondary elements (feedback comments, blog roll, track back, ping, > etc.). I'm not sure if any of these are specifically impacted by > video, but I have noted the attempts by several people to create > individual video clips and have them linked together to produce one > longer video feed. This attempt feels like a search for another > community element to be added to the toolkit. (I have had specific > experience with this type of linked video clips, where the clips were > individual head shots and comments in an asynchronous dialog.) > yes. absolutely! :-) blogs are different from journals. Journals are only internally orientated. Blogs combine internal with external and this is why/how they demonstrate emergent properties. Communities form, constellations and clusters aggregate and these emerge in the act of blogging, not before. So videoblogging should be able to support these same emergment properties. Hence we need the video equivalent of trackbacks (which has been looked after by Andreas and co), but also to link to a part of a video, and to quote video. cheers Adrian Miles +++++++++++++++++++++ http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/vog/vlog/