-
Website
http://www.scobleizer.com/ -
Original page
http://scobleizer.com/2006/09/16/to-videoblog-or-not-to-videoblog/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
danja
44 comments · 4 points
-
polizeros
52 comments · 1 points
-
AndyBeard
69 comments · 4 points
-
Zachary Adam Cohen
35 comments · 8 points
-
dbarefoot
40 comments · 3 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
The best and worst thing Twitter did in 2009: RT
16 hours ago · 20 comments
-
World-brand-building mistakes France’s entrepreneurs make
1 week ago · 181 comments
-
2010: the year SEO isn’t important anymore
6 days ago · 66 comments
-
iPhone developers abandoning app model for HTML5?
6 days ago · 51 comments
-
A 2010 real-time app development platform from Kynetx
14 hours ago · 2 comments
-
The best and worst thing Twitter did in 2009: RT
Cheers,
A
My answer to “should you videoblog?” Sure if you've got the time and it matters to you :)
In every case, it depends on the strengths of the blogger/writer/whatever, and on the audience. There's no right answer.
Personally, I won't video blog until I have something to say that requires video. I'm sure it will happen. And I don't watch video blogs at all, but that doesn't mean people shouldn't do it. It just means it's a poor way to reach me in particular...
I carry a digital camera with me most times. I have a special compartment in my knapsack for it, and if I've got my laptop with me, I've also got the camera.
The camera also takes movies. If I see something that fits in my blog that needs motion to capture it, I take a movie. Later when I'm sorting through teh stills and the movies, I review them all. If there's a good movie in there, I upload it, and link to it from my blog.
Not much controversy there. Video is another way of expressing myself, or documenting something. I've done some videos that I'm really proud of even though my blog is mostly writing (and don't forget audio, the podcasts).
http://www.scripting.com/2005/08/12.html#When:5...
I never got an adequate explanation of that phenomenon.
How could you do post that without video?
But if you want a wider audience, framing, steadicam's (tripods are too limiting, imho), good productional values, good lighting, great picture quality, good color corrections, great sound and most importantly great writing and video editing, and even if doing something LONG, make it interesting throughout, not just having those usual Channel 9 sleeping-pills yag on and on.
The recipe is easy, implementation is hard, a daily battle in TV ratings.
In one instance several thousand locals were able to view a proposed monorail plan as opposed to 30 people that actually attended the meeting. Before our recent election I was able to interview local candidates, give them exposure and help locals get an intimate understanding of potential officials.
In my estimation, videoblogging has some of the greatest promise of any “blogform” as being a critical contributor to our participation in democracy.
At the moment I'm thinking about a video ipod soley for videocasts - I'd love to have some software for my archos to do this automatically but still looking :(
Future vision(WOW I just went to a sight that has a drag and drop function for all the podcasts/videopods you want to download to your pod and guess what? All you have to do is plug in your ipod, jpod, kpod, etc. and it is all down loaded automatically while you catch snippets on the site).
What a wonderful world that would be for the technically challenged folks. Grandpa check this site out and stop trying to set that VCR clock LOL. Grampa fixs clock with single strip of black electric tape. Flashing light doesn't stop. Just goes away.
Anyone see dollar signs (hear,hear,hear)!
Welcome to the real world Neo. ; )
regards,
Russ
just to clarify my point about production values and video blogging: i think a video blog is more difficult because it has to look good, sound good, feature good content, etc. - whereas a blog post can be quickly hammered out (although good posts have to be crafted)
A 1 hour vlog? Yawn!
If you wanna be famous and use this technology to be a bad-ass, hollywood-ista, then for chrissake, just DO IT and follow the rules and spend the money and learn the skills.
If you wanna do something personal and true, screw the rules-- it can look like ass for all anyone cares.
It's a one-two punch. If you can do both, well then you deserve to get paid and can stop reading blogs all the way to the bank.
Just sayin'. Now I'm going back into my crankhole.
Will you lot PLEASE ger over yourselves?!!? I've been onlie for a QUARTER CENTURY and it was until you bloggers came along that this "A-List" bullshit was ever mentioned. There is NO "blogosphere," godammit -- but there certainly is an EGOSPHERE! And it reeks!
How about 9 words and no video ....
The same as Halo 1 and 2. But prettier.
Joel Cheesman once stated to me that you should write a blog with content you would create even if nobody else was going to read it but yourself. I'm not yet certain video presentation even meets that standard. Why? Because people tend to act differently when on camera and it takes so little time to create.
Partially true, but you left out a ton of other issues:
1) Editing, because there are always going to be parts that don't belong, like inane chatter while setting up. (Yes, I know you love those parts, but it was one reason why watching channel 9 sucked. GET TO THE POINT ALREADY.)
2) Compressing. That's not a ten-second process, and you know it.
3) Reviewing after compression. Sometimes things go wrong. Audio drift, etc. So you have to re-watch the post-compression product to make sure it still looks the way you want it too, or that you didn't accidentally set it on "ass" instead of "small"
Who said videoblogs need to look professional? If someone told you that they are totally missing the point.
They don't need to have the same level of quality as a pro in a studio, but if they look and sound too bad, then no one is going to watch them. So that's not really false. You DO need to pay attention to camera angles, sound etc.
FALSE AND TRUE. False because there are some things that just require video. Here’s a test. Give me one minute of video or 10,000 words to explain to me what Halo 3 does.
I can beat #21. What does Halo 3 do? Kill shit. Blow shit up. Loudly.
There, 6 words. You should pick a better example than the best example of why the videogame industry is selling to the same people over and over and over.
My Channel 9 videos were regularly 50 or more minutes long and, while some people complained, I really didn’t ever listen to them. It still built an audience of 4.3 million unique visitors in a month. If you want to watch short videos that don’t go in depth I suggest you don’t watch my show
Oh dear god, you're equating visitors with people watching all 50+ minutes of those dreadfully boring videos? Could you spin your numbers any higher? Good job Robert, you're officially nothing more than a PR wonk.
Dude, you are in worse need of an editor than Frank Herbert, and that's saing something. We all could tell you never listened to anyone, you made the same damned mistakes over and over and over again. Like watching the same "Interview with my family" video, done by ten year old Jimmy at family reunions, and trying desparately to figure out where they store the damned thing so it can meet up with an "accident".
Robert, seriously...either learn more about the process of filming people, or stop giving advice. Blind leading the blind at the moment.
Here's the part that you missed:
"What I mean by 'visuals' is that I have to have a reason to be videocasting. Just sitting there jabbering away like I would do on an audio podcast is going to get boring very quickly. In cases like that, there's no need for the video so I would have to create the need."
Do you need visuals? No, but if you don't have them, why are you videocasting? That's the whole point of the visual medium, dude.
If I want to learn how someone looks and behaves, for instance, a videoblog is a much better way than even a photography.
But, in general I agree that having a good visual reason to use video makes sense.
Sure a vlog will explain how great Halo 3 image will be if compared to 'dull' ordinary blog post. But can't a blog post (text post that is) embeded the Halo 3 video? This way, the page size will be far smaller (because the writer's rants will be in form of text, not video) and easier to build.
Vlog will be a nice intermezzo into the blogosphere but it's not here to stay. Just look how long have we have podcast going around but it still can't catch up with blogging (despite several pundits claimed podcast will, someday...)
Good Topic Scobleizer.
MB
The way we present ourselves to others is unique,because each person is different and therefore in cyberspace this presentation of ourselves should also be so.
If everyone was the same and acted the same what advantage would that be for anyone? I believe such a thing would severly limit our growth as a species.
The meat of life is how we are the same butthe desert is how we are different.
AXE
I met you a blogher during the videoblogging workshop and you gave me a few video shooting tips and I'm captured them with the mpeg setting my digital camera. I'm new to videoblogging and work with nonprofits. I've hesitated in even trying to video blog because of my misconceptions about difficulty.
However, I've decided to explore and edited that clip into a short how-to flick
http://www.netsquared.org/blog/kanter/to-video-...
I don't want imply that video is bad, just that if one does not prepare visual aids or otherwise take advantage of video, then audio is a better solution IMHO.