Comments on: Video: The Next Generation of Web Content?

By: uberVU - social comments

uberVU - social comments — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 20:12:32 +0000

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by adamds: Is video the next generation of web content? http://su.pr/92TtCq...

By: Adam

Adam — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 17:30:44 +0000

Hey Kenji – interesting link, no question, but I think no matter what kind of fancy technological solution we come up with, the human brain can’t process scanned images and sounds as fast as it can scanned text. Therefore, we’ll always be able to absorb more from text than video.. unless we get a Matrix-like solution where we plug video directly into our brain… but I haven’t seen that yet.

By: Kenji Crosland

Kenji Crosland — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:47:14 +0000

Your post inspired me to invent a scannable type of video. I did a quick search and it looks like someone beat me to the punch: http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=4083. Not sure how reliable the technology is, but it’s interesting.

Even with this development, I’m sure text will be still be king on the internet.

By: Tweets that mention Video: The Next Generation of Web Content? — www.AdamDiStefano.com -- Topsy.com

Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:13:38 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by edwardboches, Yifei Zhang. Yifei Zhang said: RT @edwardboches good post from @adamds on whether video is next generation of web content http://bit.ly/69H4xN [...]

By: Adam

Adam — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:09:03 +0000

Hey Paul – I actually think videos of artist working is precisely one of the ways that I refer to when I say, “do something that you can’t already do with text.” A friend recommended I check out Val’s Art Diary (valsartdiary.com)

As for a video camera, pocket camcorders have become all the rage of late, and you can get a Mino Flip (or some competitor) for under $200 USD. Still not gratos, but a far cry from the close to $1K+ camcorders I remember from a few years ago.

Lastly, about the music, you’re right about the copyright issue, but I think that creates an opportunity. If you know local musicians, and enjoy their music, use that as your background music. They’ll love the exposure, and you don’t have to create silent films (plus, they’ll owe you a favour).

I look forward to seeing some of your videos, Paulie.

By: Paul D. Selman

Paul D. Selman — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 10:42:13 +0000

Interesting article, as usual, Adam. The subject of Internet video intrigues me as I have a sneaking suspicion I’m eventually going to try my hand at it. At the moment, I’m attempting to make my website (which is a kind of journal for my creative process as an artist) more interesting for the reader by showing my artwork at various incremental stages in the process, by means of photographing or scanning the pieces along the way, rather than just presenting the finished piece.
Video seems to me to be the next logical step in giving my readers some insight into my process. I’ve been giving some thought to filming myself working (focussing on my hands and the piece of work; nobody wants to see my ugly mug) and posting the video to my website for people to watch. What’s holding me back is (a) I don’t have a video camera at the moment and the funds to purchase one would need to be found from somewhere and (b) I have to admit to being more than a little camera-shy.
There’s also the issue of copyright to be considered. I always work to music, and there are legal issues surrounding putting videos on the Internet with music on them that you don’t own the rights to. This would leave me with the choice of making silent movies, but that would mean I couldn’t narrate my progress, or working without music playing, which is certainly not an appealing thought.