Scobleizer - Latest Comments in To videoblog or not to videoblog

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Benoit Marchal — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 18:19:03 -0000

I find that for most vlog, the image is not very interesting. Poor quality and it does not *show* anything or contribute to the understanding. If that's the case, I'd rather have audio. It's more convenient: you can listen to it in the car, while jogging, shopping, in the metro, anywhere. Video requires more attention.

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.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Latest News — Tue, 19 Sep 2006 12:54:48 -0000

Video bloging is also good for shareing the things

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Beth — Tue, 19 Sep 2006 11:06:09 -0000

Hi Robert,

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/b...

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

axewielderx — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 22:46:11 -0000

So many comments on this not even sure I should bother.(Almost wishes he had this many comments on any of his posts)

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

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

The Monologue Blogger — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 17:29:04 -0000

I feel that to use Video Blogging or VLOGGING as is often used, it truly depends on the purpose. There shouldn't even be a debate about this to be honest. If using video on your blogsite makes sense, then by all means use it. It shouldn't be measured by the difficulty, but by whether or not it makes sense for your viewers as well as the content on your site. Besides, vlogging is not that difficult to do. And it should be fun, not argumentative. In addition, sooner or later "the haters" of vlogging will have to realize that the future of the internet is going to be VIDEO, if it isn't already.

Good Topic Scobleizer.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Jonny Goldstein — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:04:24 -0000

Oskar. Yes. You can embed the in a blog post. That is what videobloggers do. Videoblogging is not necessarily an alternative to text blogging; it's just an expansion of it. You aren't throwing out text just because you want to link to some video.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Oskar Syahbana — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 15:43:23 -0000

Geez Robert, so many points to counterpoint up there. But I'll only highlight what I think is the most 'FALSE' of your statement.

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...)

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Jonny Goldstein — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 14:27:04 -0000

Somethings are best expressed with video. Here's my video response to Alec Saunders called Why Alec Saunders Should Vlog.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Robert Scoble — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 13:56:42 -0000

Jon: you're right, I missed that. In TV lingo "visuals" means graphics on screen. Also, I've gotten stuff out of videoblogs even when there aren't really good visuals.

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.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Jon — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 12:53:58 -0000

You missed the point, Robert. Why don't you include all of the relevant parts of my argument instead of just one part that serves your purpose?

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.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

John C. Welch — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 11:48:34 -0000

TRUE. But not for the reason you might think. It’s cause the files take longer to upload

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.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

David Dalka — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 11:31:45 -0000

Text blogs and video blogs should be on seperate scales. I mean honestly, would you compare TV ratings to a newspaper circulation? No, you wouldn't because they are totally different things.

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.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Rob Hyndman — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 10:09:09 -0000

On the whole production values thing: you can't (or at least, shouldn't :) ) video blog in your underwear. So, in terms of complexity, time, resources, etc. podcasting = blogging ++ various complexities, and videoblogging = podcasting ++ again. Surely, and unsurprisingly.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Ross — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 09:58:43 -0000

"Give me one minute of video or 10,000 words to explain to me what Halo 3 does."

How about 9 words and no video ....

The same as Halo 1 and 2. But prettier.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

penguinsix — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 08:58:32 -0000

With video people often focus on other things--what you are wearing, your hair, your background--instead of what you are saying.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Mike Cane — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 08:56:51 -0000

>>>UPDATE: Andrew Baron (the guy who does Rocketboom) points out that videobloggers are joining the A list at a very quick rate.

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!

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Eric Rice — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 08:09:12 -0000

Hey, glad to see this conversation pop up for the 90 millionth time. Anyway, like we haven't been doing things with video cameras for years now. Oh no, see, now that it's in the nerd sphere, we have to be trendy and predictable and diss it. Debate it.

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.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

ajcann — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 08:05:43 -0000

First and foremost, you need content which is appropriate to videoblogging. zefrank. Need I say more.
A 1 hour vlog? Yawn!

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

mark evans — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 07:58:36 -0000

robert,
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)

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Russ Henry — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 07:32:37 -0000

Don't forget to make it eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeasy.

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

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

monkeyleader — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 06:09:02 -0000

so my own take on this - I listen to and watch a lot of pod/video casts. The big benefit for podcasts is being able to listen on the move (ie walking, running etc) I do however love watching video podcasts and these range from a few short minutes to almost an hour. As long as the information is relevant and keeps me entertained I'll watch it. I agree howeer for videocasts you need to make the time to watch, podcasts can be picked throughout the day.

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 :(

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Darin Codon — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 05:33:00 -0000

Video Journalism is the most honest form of Journalism. I’ve found on my Branson Missouri site an amazing response to the video posts I’ve put up.

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.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Robert Scoble — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 04:47:14 -0000

Alec, sorry about that. Fixed.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

Andy Cunningham — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 04:42:56 -0000

Should you vlog? Absolutely, if that's what you want to do. Will I watch it? Almost certainly not, unless it's sufficiently relevant to my daily life. To watch it, I need to devote time to do so. I can skim blogs while on conference calls. I can listen to podcasts in the car. But if I want to get the information from your video, I've got to sit down and watch it - and if I can get the information any quicker way, I will.

Re: To videoblog or not to videoblog

toivo — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 03:17:20 -0000

wireless mike? any recommendations?