Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [videoblogging] Re: Veoh is dead

Expand Messages
  • Brook Hinton
    Veoh is still up. For those of you who can t live without divx rips of Matthew Barney s cremaster series, you have a reprieve. B ... --
    Message 1 of 20 , Mar 12, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Veoh is still up. For those of you who can't live without divx rips of
      Matthew Barney's cremaster series, you have a reprieve.

      B

      On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Rupert Howe <rupert@...> wrote:
      > It's not unlike TV, really.  There are thousands of bad channels, a
      > lot of shitty formats, and a small amount of shows of real quality.
      >
      > In terms of availability of IPTV, and the development of web TV, it's
      > like TV was back in the mid 1940s.
      >
      > The money and infrastructure in TV allows the development of quality
      > drama and comedy, which is a really hard thing to achieve (even in cop
      > show & sitcom formats).
      >
      > In TV, huge systems are in place to support and promote good drama.
      > Periodically, TV drama production comes under attack from insecure
      > executives - and so drama shifts from channel to channel (HBO has had
      > a good decade for instance) but if you look at the machinery behind
      > even a mediocre soap, it's massive.  Writers, script editors,
      > producers, commissioning editors, channel controllers, schedulers,
      > directors, performers, technicians, marketing departments.
      >
      > At some level, all these people - at the top of their professions -
      > are all giving input to find the best material and iron out the creases.
      >
      > I don't know how independent web producers are ever going to replicate
      > this level of infrastructure and support - I'm trying to figure that
      > out.  But as much as some of us might feel squirmy about awards
      > ceremonies, I think the Streamys help a lot by pointing out the good
      > stuff.   Otherwise, where do we look to find it?  Meanwhile, the age
      > of widespread IPTV is speeding towards us.
      >
      > Rupert
      > http://twittervlog.tv
      >
      > On 19 Feb 2010, at 21:09, Adam Quirk wrote:
      >
      >> You're awesome Rox. Thanks for persevering and doing what you love.
      >>
      >> You are a great example to point to when people start out in this
      >> medium, or any medium actually. Some people get into something like
      >> web video or blogging and make something for a couple months, then get
      >> frustrated when nobody is paying them $100k for their work. As 99% of
      >> newcomers drop off after a few weeks or months because of their
      >> unfulfilled feelings of entitlement, the people who are really
      >> passionate push on and keep doing what they love regardless of
      >> financial reward.
      >>
      >> <bitter> As to Sull's points, there's a much larger quantity of
      >> creators these days, I agree, but the percentage of good stuff to bad
      >> stuff has not increased with the level of technology. The signal to
      >> noise is obviously much worse than when there were 100 of us making
      >> stuff. And the quality has suffered due to an influx of Hollywood
      >> types trying to stuff Hollywood productions into a web video box.
      >> Which usually doesn't work because they are generally out of work in
      >> the first place because they weren't very good at their jobs in
      >> Hollywood, and even if they were, that doesn't translate very well on
      >> the web. That translation problem could soon be a thing of the past
      >> since everything will be funneled to our TVs in the coming years, but
      >> it still doesn't solve the problem of bad writing and acting.
      >> </bitter>
      >>
      >> Disclosure: I am a Streamys judge and IAWTV member. There is some damn
      >> good material out there. It's not easy to find. The technical arts are
      >> on par with the best TV and Hollywood. The writing/acting stuff needs
      >> a lot of work.
      >>
      >> --
      >>
      >> Adam Quirk
      >> http://wreckandsalvage.com
      >>
      >> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Roxanne Darling <okekai@...>
      >> wrote:
      >> > I am enjoying reading all these comments - though my head is like a
      >> > ping pong ball banging back and forth as I agree with virtually
      >> all of
      >> > the statements!
      >> >
      >> > Most of all though I have had a lifelong irritation with virtually
      >> > every industry I have worked in that values the stuff more than the
      >> > people. Conferences will pay for fancy programs and glitch and glam
      >> > yet want speakers to pay their own way. Businesses will spend
      >> $40,000
      >> > on a one seat bathroom, and kvetch about a website that costs $5000
      >> > (that is a real example from one of our earlier clients.) Velvet
      >> seats
      >> > for the theatre and fancy cocktail parties for the donors yet the
      >> > ballerinas make pennies. So that prob is nothing for us to feel
      >> > special about. :-)
      >> >
      >> > Our show is approaching it's 4th anniversary - we were "late" to the
      >> > party but there is still energy there I cannot define. At it's root,
      >> > people feel good when they watch it.  For me, after 757 episodes, it
      >> > still has meaning, and we still have ideas, but it is much harder to
      >> > find the time. We've had almost no sponsorship or financial
      >> support in
      >> > the entire term.
      >> >
      >> > Anyway, I just posted the first thing in several weeks - it's a nice
      >> > oddball show that speaks to the videoblog sensibility not the hulu
      >> > one, that I hope might help you feel good too.
      >> > http://www.beachwalks.tv/2010/02/15/beach-walk-757-waves-washing-over-us/
      >> >
      >> > Though I really do like watching 30Rock on hulu from the laptop
      >> while
      >> > cooking dinner!
      >> >
      >> > Love,
      >> >
      >> > Rox
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Michael Sullivan <sulleleven@...
      >> > wrote:
      >> >> i dont think their is much getting around the fact that making
      >> good money
      >> >> with web video 'shows' is extremely difficult and frustrating.
      >> >> in a sense, technology advancements have helped and hindered.
      >> accessible
      >> >> tech equates to enormous competition, redundancy and noise.
      >> imagine if
      >> >> rocketboom launched today instead of in 2005ish.
      >> >>
      >> >> this is not to say that good independently produced content is
      >> rare.  its
      >> >> just a really hard business as far as i can tell and why i never
      >> took the
      >> >> business of web video seriously.  i knew that a few video tech
      >> services
      >> >> would succeed (i.e youtube) while most would fail.
      >> >> and of course some shows would have some meaningful success while
      >> most
      >> >> others would fizzle or at least reformat with subsequent
      >> attempts.  its easy
      >> >> to try out ideas and fail rapidly and reinvent etc etc.
      >> >>
      >> >> in many cases, success will come with the sacrifice of making
      >> video that you
      >> >> dont really want to make as a creative.  way back when, i made
      >> some cash
      >> >> doing wedding videos and shit like that but hated it.
      >> >> but if i wanted to make any money at all with video making, i'd
      >> have to
      >> >> consider such work.... their are various needs for video footage
      >> these days
      >> >> as its basically like a commodity.  so you can find work but its
      >> more taking
      >> >> video as opposed to making video.  and i've never been very
      >> interested in
      >> >> that dilution.  thats just me (when it comes to video). if i was
      >> able to
      >> >> take significant time off and had some decent money and trustful
      >> talented
      >> >> people to collaborate with, i would love to make a 'film'.  but
      >> we all know
      >> >> how difficult that is too.
      >> >>
      >> >> their is always hope.  but typically the best way to have fun
      >> making video
      >> >> is to keep it a hobby.
      >> >> that hobby can generate a portfolio for you that could land you
      >> some
      >> >> interesting work one day.
      >> >> or at least you have some stuff to show the grandkids.... to
      >> repeat what our
      >> >> recent ancestors also used video for.  video time capsules.
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 9:55 PM, Jay dedman
      >> <jay.dedman@...> wrote:
      >> >>
      >> >>>
      >> >>>
      >> >>> > Do you think its safe to try discussing the creation aspect,
      >> now that
      >> >>> there are presumably less people participating here, and there
      >> is no longer
      >> >>> a danger of urinating on the newborn flames of vlog hope where
      >> everything
      >> >>> seemed possible because that time has long >passed?
      >> >>>
      >> >>> My friend, David, coincidentally wrote a relevant post today about
      >> >>> creators developing fans and finding alternative means of funding:
      >> >>>
      >> >>> http://el-oso.net/blog/archives/2010/02/11/the-creative-class-and-crowdfunding/
      >> >>> It's not specific about video and riffs on the "1000 True Fans"
      >> >>> theory, but still interesting to see how things are evolving.
      >> >>>
      >> >>>
      >> >>> Jay
      >> >>>
      >> >>> --
      >> >>> http://ryanishungry.com
      >> >>> http://momentshowing.net
      >> >>> http://twitter.com/jaydedman
      >> >>> 917 371 6790
      >> >>>
      >> >>>
      >> >>>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> ------------------------------------
      >> >>
      >> >> Yahoo! Groups Links
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > --
      >> > Roxanne Darling
      >> > "o ke kai" means "of the sea" in hawaiian
      >> > 808-384-5554
      >> > Video --> http://www.beachwalks.tv
      >> > Company -- > http://www.barefeetstudios.com
      >> > Twitter--> http://www.twitter.com/roxannedarling
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > ------------------------------------
      >> >
      >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >>
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >



      --
      _______________________________________________________
      Brook Hinton
      film/video/audio art
      www.brookhinton.com
      studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.