FORUMS: list search recent posts

Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bill Davis
Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 2:01:42 am

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/10033473/Eric-Schmidt-televisi...

Agree or disagree - it's an interesting perspective from a guy who should have a clue about tech trends.

FWIW.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 2:11:35 am

If I was executive chairman of Google I would say the same thing. Doesn't make it true. They clearly want YouTube to displace traditional broadcast delivery of entertainment and it is obvious to all that delivery of entertainment content via the web will be a clear winner over fixed cable or transmitted TV.

But to call the days of television as already over is premature. Even the article admits that in the UK, TV watching is way ahead of YouTube.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 2:45:15 am

Like the article says, YouTube viewership is measured in minutes per day while TV viewership is measured in hours. YouTube wants desperately to be more like traditional distribution because traditional distributors make money. Cat videos do not make money. YouTube's overhead for being a global depository of video is huge (70hrs of new video is uploaded each minute) and only a small fraction of all the content they host can be meaningfully monetized. Hence the push for more premium and original content on YT. That push isn't without pain either

Hulu, Neflix and even Amazon w/it's streaming service are in better positions to expand delivery away from traditional outlets than YT, IMO.




Return to posts index


Rafael Amador
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 5:03:11 am

A lot of fuss with the decline of broadcast TV.
Do you remember the song "Video Killed the Radio Star"?
That was 30 years ago and still waiting for the decease of the radio, industry that I think is healthier than ever.
Internet Killed the TV Star?
Lets see in 30 years time.
BTW, the fact that for people on his 20s, TV is not a priority shouldn't amaze nobody. That has always been like that. The opposite would be sad.







rafael


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 5:28:30 am

The other thing to remember besides the fact that a shift in distribution has been happening for nearly a decade is the fact that there will always be demand for highly produced, broadcast-quality entertainment. People will want to watch shows like Mad Men, Game of Thrones and Arrested Development any way they can.

Production and distribution are two entirely different things.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Joseph Owens
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 6, 2013 at 11:15:00 pm

[David Lawrence] "Production and distribution are two entirely different things."

Practically two different industries. That's what I get from my producer-clients.

So... any of you watch sports?

Yes, I know the leagues have their streaming websites -- and they are definitely monetized to the tune of a buck a day plus whatever your provider fees are, and pro sports are about nothing if not commercial advertising--- and the way to the viewers is broadcast.

jPo

"I always pass on free advice -- its never of any use to me" Oscar Wilde.


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 9:39:02 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Hulu, Neflix and even Amazon w/it's streaming service are in better positions to expand delivery away from traditional outlets than YT, IMO."

Agreed.


Return to posts index

Michael Garber
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 6:19:46 pm

I tend to agree with Schmidt. Unscientifically speaking, 90% of my video viewing these days is on a computer. And the comments section for the videos or content I'm watching can be part of that experience, depending on what I'm viewing.

The other 10% is watching streaming movies or shows on Netflix/Hulu/etc, HBO for it's series (not ready to move to HBO Go quite yet as there's no surround sound. I'd say the only time I watch traditional cable TV is when I'm home sick or just bored of the Internet. Otherwise, I find searching for content and watching short form pieces more interesting.

Michael Garber
5th Wall - a post production company
Blog: GARBERSHOP


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 9:42:39 am

[Bill Davis] "Agree or disagree"

Frankly, I think it sounds more desperate than prophetic.


Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 12:21:37 pm

"Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days..."

What you see is what you are looking for.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 2:09:56 pm

Interesting points made by everyone. I think an issue is that it's not really an "either, or" issue. Shifts don't seem to be absolute except maybe over very long periods.

First we should differentiate between "broadcast" over the air and "cable" TV. Given Cable penetration, Broadcast over the air may well be in such decline as one might question the cost of transmission vs those not connected in any other fashion.

Another assumption is that adding one means of distribution has an almost equal decline in another. There's a decline, but it's far from equal. The numbers I see on "cord cutting" (Cable) is fairly low although certainly noticeable. Ironically some of the cord cutters do use Broadcast over the air since those a freely available.

Online distribution does have a number of advantages as well as disadvantages. Advantages are obviously one is no longer tied to a viewing schedule (appointment viewing). Much of the same content on Cable and Broadcast is available a short time later on line. Additionally when using Netflix and similar services on line, the "b" movies are pretty much the same ones shown on Broadcast/Cable. Additionally all this allows for varying degrees of social interaction with other viewers (and sometimes the creators) through comments and user ratings.

One disadvantage is the fragmentation online causes. It seems more severe than Cable. Cable offers packages of channels but, not all providers offer all channels. That's more extreme in on line distribution. The viewer might get a bunch of TV programs, original content, older movies, on Netflix but it would seem a lot is missing. One could very well end up subscribing to Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Prime, buy individual recent releases from iTunes. The result is that the user really does have to buy all the "packages" to get all the content (some of it duplicated across services) to get all the original content. The total bill to the viewer may have no cost advantage.

While I do think Broadcast over the air is in serious decline, Cable in a much milder decline, the result will still be a mix of distribution for some time (years) to come.

For many, a Cable package may still feel more inclusive for "one stop shopping" and, these days, offering more of their content online for VOD viewing without the "appointment."

Least we forget there's another related branch because the Cable services are also major Internet Service Providers and there's still some flux in the economics around that.

The bigger issues is the battle over the "libraries" of content whether, original, licensed shows previously on Broadcast or Cable, older movies, new releases and, the ease of centralized access vs fragmented distribution as well as cost for the viewer. Cable will decline only to the extent where online distribution, with its fragmentation, is OK for a given viewer. It's not a one for one swap.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 3:26:44 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Least we forget there's another related branch because the Cable services are also major Internet Service Providers and there's still some flux in the economics around that.
"


A key point that is almost always forgotten in the face-value version of this discussion.


Return to posts index


Bernard Newnham
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 3:47:25 pm

Our 60mBit internet connection comes courtesy of the fibre optic cable from Virgin. All of our services - phone, tv, internet come from them, so we're a bit bound up with them these days.

I certainly watch a lot less real time tv these days, because of the Tivo box that's also part of the service. YouTube is one of the channels, but I haven't seen any of my family (19-66 ages) watching it too much, if at all. Unless YouTube feel like buying Suits or Spooks or whatever, I can't see them taking over tv.

B







Bernie


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 4:30:31 pm

All of this is an argument about the method of distribution, not how the content is created. I know several people who produce content for Google - both canned corporate marketing pieces and TV shows. The methods of production and post are more or less the same as anything else on TV. Except sometimes lower budgets and YouTube isn't making money.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 5:24:27 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Except sometimes lower budgets and YouTube isn't making money.
"


Yet.

Remember the giant red ink mess that was Amazon for it's first decade plus? Now it's a different story with revenue growth above 45% in services and 18% in products in the recent reporting quarter. Huge scale capacity build-outs in response to shifting technology seems to be one of the modern games that the serious market players feel is wise. They don't always look to make money immediately - they look for position in expanding sectors so that they can make more money over a longer timeframe as society undergoes transformative change.

All the kids who are leaving network TV today may in fact come back to become tomorrows couch potatoes (deploying the Quayle "e" for nostalgia) basking in a living room screen glow just like their parents and grandparents. Or maybe not.

Funny everyone keeps noting Game of Thrones. I watched most of the first season. Thought it was very well done. Then got distracted by life and haven't seen an episode since. I expect that I'll someday watch it in my new TV consumption mode, which is to stockpile entire seasons of quality shows via either NetFlix or iTunes subscription - then consume them as wanted while I'm doing the modern life necessarily evil tasks like tromping on my treadmill. But at some point, if I end up moving to someplace where the climate is more tuned to summer outdoor walking, maybe I'll never get around to watching them at all - opting for more real hiking and less "tube" hiking.

As always, only time will tell.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 5:57:52 pm

[Bill Davis] " I expect that I'll someday watch it in my new TV consumption mode, which is to stockpile entire seasons of quality shows via either NetFlix or iTunes subscription - then consume them as wanted while I'm doing the modern life necessarily evil tasks like tromping on my treadmill."

But in your own example - the method of prod and post - that which pays the bills for most in this forum - didn't change.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 7:12:09 pm

[Oliver Peters] "But in your own example - the method of prod and post - that which pays the bills for most in this forum - didn't change."

Nobody here is arguing that there will suddenly be NO value to quality produced content. Thats just silly.

What we're arguing is whether or not toolsets (like the one directly mentioned in this Forum's header!) have a strong future inside this changing industry.

WHere the change is happening most is not the important thing. It's that the change is transformative - rather than just adaptive, IMO.

I've written here many times, that even back during the big hoopla in the first months about X, I was less focused on things like the magnetic timeline - and MUCH more focused on interface element such as the Project Library and things like the Share menu's direct link to on-line deployment options.

Those seem to me to be the philosophical shifts that Apple has made. They see a future of content that needs to be made more rapidly, with automation wherever possible to let the user get better results more quickly in an environment where the time it takes to perfect is sometimes not time particularly well spent.

The while point of YouTube is that it's NOT a world of 30 and 60 minute program blocks that all will have value in re-runs of those same 30-60 minute blocks - all purpose built with holes for commercials. THATs what professional TV production has been building towards for 30 years. But when I pay for content via iTunes, what do I get? Content built for the old model that has jump cuts that reveal the "arc-gaps" in the stories that were designed to keep people watching through commercial breaks that aren't even THERE anymore.

The competitive video world of the net is clearly a place of 1 to 5 minute "information and entertainment blocks" served up on demand. That's what that market wants. And when I need to figure out quickly how to change a tail light on my car, or want to personally hear what a thought leader said yesterday, its a system that satisfies it's audience far better than appointment viewing.

And it seems to me the more I use it, X is a pretty IDEAL tool for creating and deploying that type of modern and agilily-consumable media.

The odd thing is that when I go to create or edit one of my vaulted long form programs - the tools in X make THAT easier to handle as well!

I originally imagined that X would be a tool similar to what I'd had in the past - just newer, maybe faster, and perhaps better able to preserve the quality my better cameras could generate more easily.

I did NOT expect to be led into an entirely transformed video landscape by X. But that's kinda exactly what happened.

The bottom line is that I respect the production and post traditions we all grew up in. But the industry (and more, the market!) is evolving fast. And in a garden experiencing fast growth, weeding and re-planting can be as critical as initial plant selection.

We can go with different variations of the old roses - or we can try new plant types entirely.

Up to us.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 8:46:48 pm

[Bill Davis] "I originally imagined that X would be a tool similar to what I'd had in the past - just newer, maybe faster, and perhaps better able to preserve the quality my better cameras could generate more easily.

I did NOT expect to be led into an entirely transformed video landscape by X. But that's kinda exactly what happened."


Bill, with all due respect, many of us have been part of this transformed landscape for years. It's really not that new and while FCPX has many interesting and powerful tools, I see no evidence it's better suited for today's general production needs than any of the other modern NLE's. Production workflows will always be dependent on the nature of the production and neither FCPX nor the evolving distribution landscape changes that.

But I'm glad you've found a tool that you like and that has opened your eyes to the digital media revolution. Welcome to the party! ;)

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 9:13:03 pm

[David Lawrence] "Bill, with all due respect, many of us have been part of this transformed landscape for years. It's really not that new and while FCPX has many interesting and powerful tools, I see no evidence it's better suited for today's general production needs than any of the other modern NLE's. Production workflows will always be dependent on the nature of the production and neither FCPX nor the evolving distribution landscape changes that."

And what makes you think I "haven't" been part of the same landscape you have? If you think I've been sequestered away from the editing transformation up to this point, you're very much mistaken.

I was one of the EARLIEST adopters of FCP-Legacy - cutting on it starting literally two weeks after I saw the demo of it at NAB 1999. I built my entire video business on it's very capable shoulders. I also spent the entire decade from 2000 to 2010 writing about NLE operations as a contributing editor at a national video magazine. So it's hard to argue that I'm ignorant of the history of NLE development.

In fact it's THAT perspective that makes X seem so fresh and potentially transformative to me.

While many of my fellow editors of the early part of this century were stuck in CMX, or ADO, or later, AVID-land who were eventually forcefully dragged into accepting a "amateur DV oriented tool" like FCP-Legacy as it evolved - I embraced the possibilities pretty darn early.

I also, thankfully, was was constantly using other tools like Filemaker Pro in parallel, learning asset organization fundamentals to leverage what I couldn't accomplish as easily inside my NLE.

Having a system in front of me today that combines elements of both database and content editor pretty seamlessly is part of the fun now of being an X editor.

I do see the X appraoch as transformative since with it, Apple was willing to cut loose many of the "everyone will want to edit like film and TV pros have for decades" conventions that were being followed in a relatively lock-step fashion.

You clearly think I've got a shortsighted view. I suspect you might in a few areas as well.

And I suppose it's very likely that we're both more or less correct! ; )

FWIW.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 9:29:52 pm

[Bill Davis] "And what makes you think I "haven't" been part of the same landscape you have?"

I never said that. But your posts imply that. A "share" button does not a revolution make. Just sayin'. ;)

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 10:24:37 pm

[David Lawrence] "A "share" button does not a revolution make. Just sayin'. ;)"

Well, for me it kinda does.

Because it makes me grin wildly every single time I hit it and know I won't have to spend another frustrated hour burning another freeking client review DVD!

That, as the ads say - is Priceless.

The stuff of real, personal happiness.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 10:30:13 pm

[Bill Davis] "Because it makes me grin wildly every single time I hit it and know I won't have to spend another frustrated hour burning another freeking client review DVD!"

Your clients still ask for DVDs? You need to train them better!

DVDs make me sad, but happily, it's been years since I had to deliver in that format. I thank HD.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 10:40:47 pm

[Bill Davis] "Well, for me it kinda does.

Because it makes me grin wildly every single time I hit it and know I won't have to spend another frustrated hour burning another freeking client review DVD!"


You do know that before the Vimeo link all you had to do was just upload it to Vimeo, right? I haven't sent out an approval DVD five or six years. Maybe longer.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 11:22:18 pm

[Chris Harlan] "You do know that before the Vimeo link all you had to do was just upload it to Vimeo, right? I haven't sent out an approval DVD five or six years. Maybe longer."

Maybe in TV Station land.

I've got mostly corporate suite clients. When they want to watch a DVD in a board room, they still have to call up "facilities" and have them send a tech.

They can mostly play them on their laptops - but only if the DVD player auto loads and the big PLAY button appears!

Allowing an employee to access commercial service video content over the corporate IT pipes via something like Vimeo is beyond unthikable in most of the corporate world.

Hell, allow that and everyone will be watching the Daily Show reruns rather than working! (which is actually probably true to an extent.)

As "insulated" as you see my thinking as being in these debates, I see yours as exactly the same in expecting the norm to be exclusively what others in a broadcast production world would reasonably expect.

And again TV and Movie Pros are only a small fraction of the class of "content creators" these days - and not at all the fastest growing class IMO.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 11:31:02 pm

[Bill Davis] "Allowing an employee to access commercial service video content over the corporate IT pipes via something like Vimeo is beyond unthikable in most of the corporate world.

Hel"


Try drop box. All they have to do is click once.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 11:50:24 pm

[Bill Davis] "As "insulated" as you see my thinking as being in these debates, I see yours as exactly the same in expecting the norm to be exclusively what others in a broadcast production world would reasonably expect.

And again TV and Movie Pros are only a small fraction of the class of "content creators" these days - and not at all the fastest growing class IMO.
"


Look, Bill. An NLE is like a word processor. All kinds of people use it for all kinds of things. Trying to figure out who will dominate and win on either device is absurd.

You keep attributing thoughts to people that just aren't there. I don't expect the norm to be what studio production expects. I totally get why X might be more attractive to others, and have said so on many occasions. Yet you seem to continue to insist that I don't believe that, or that I don't somehow believe there is room for a whole variety of alternatives.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 12:56:22 am

[Chris Harlan] "You do know that before the Vimeo link all you had to do was just upload it to Vimeo, right? I haven't sent out an approval DVD five or six years. Maybe longer.
"


On the last two documentaries I've worked on we've sent out stacks of DVDs to film festivals, sales agents, distributors, potential investors, etc.,. Probably a difference between long form content, short form content and where people prefer to watch each. We used streaming services as well but I think some people just like getting packages in the mail. lol




Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 4:13:06 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Probably a difference between long form content, short form content and where people prefer to watch each."

Undoubtedly that is the case. And, my files are generally for approval, so they are only going to a few people, and usually at their desks. At this point, though, when I receive a temp, I much prefer file over DVD.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 8:55:42 pm

[Bill Davis] "and things like the Share menu's direct link to on-line deployment options.
"


thread this is - I half think the point is that Television and broadcast are terms that match with Telephone and landline.

Tv is basically factual and non-factual storytelling, news and sports? those things are no more dependent on the word TV than they are pressed paper.
the point is we have TVs. The object still determines what we expect to receive. I expect the Nine O'clock news. And match of the day. Television stations exist to service televisions. It's a pretty deep model. Society is very invested in it. We all have televisions.

well bar me - i've been off the TV license for three years. I have a polite discussion with the BBC license fee service providers about every year or so confirming I'm not receiving live broadcast. Started as an experiment moving house and stuck. plus my only option at the moment would be to put money in rupert murdoch's pocket, and well - no.

All that aside - with reference to the original quote up top - Bill, with the best will in the world, you really can overstate that sharing option. You sometimes describe it as an almost warp drive advance where my content is umbilically linked to the various online delivery platforms. It is, Bill, an encode shortcut. Part of me enjoys the notion you put forth that it represents the spear's tip for a massively modular future-scape of consensual media delivery auto-updating components ala ibooks - but mate - its not.
it's just an encode throughput. On some level I would naturally gravitate to a local encode at ProRes master to check that everything is as I think it should be - before sending out to any wide beyond.

don't get me wrong - it is cool in that it almost deliberately indicates that an encode can actually be viewed as a "publish"/ broadcast push.
I think it is a tip of the cap mindset alterer as much as anything.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 10:13:46 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Tv is basically factual and non-factual storytelling, news and sports?"

Actually - I forgot narrative lottery systems there - Roman Colosseum Pop Idol thunder dromes.
We're Monkeys in the end - we scream at that stuff?

Hope Lotteries are audience heroin really. Bottom line - however troubled the TV construct might be - lots of it directly belongs to it.
Television is a big psychological construct - it is also a central object in your home. It has the Telephone beat there.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 9:10:12 pm

[Bill Davis] "The competitive video world of the net is clearly a place of 1 to 5 minute "information and entertainment blocks" served up on demand. That's what that market wants. And when I need to figure out quickly how to change a tail light on my car, or want to personally hear what a thought leader said yesterday, its a system that satisfies it's audience far better than appointment viewing.

And it seems to me the more I use it, X is a pretty IDEAL tool for creating and deploying that type of modern and agilily-consumable media."


There is a market of some sort there, yes. However, to say it is clearly THE market of the net is blatantly wrong. Netflix and iTunes would certainly disagree with you, and they have the balance sheets to prove it.

If you want to say that X is the breakfast of champions for DIY makers, I can't argue, though I'm sure they could use any other NLE, as well. And since most of the world is still WIN based, I would imagine that a big portion of those DIY makers will want to use something that runs on that platform.

[Bill Davis] "And it seems to me the more I use it, X is a pretty IDEAL tool for creating and deploying that type of modern and agilily-consumable media.
"


Of course, following your own logic about expense, why aren't these folks better off with Adobe Elements or Pinnacle Studio? Sure, X has a lot more stuff, but these others get the job done just fine, and at a fraction of the cost. And, many if not most of them can stay on their native platform.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 10:04:12 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Sure, X has a lot more stuff, but these others get the job done just fine, and at a fraction of the cost. And, many if not most of them can stay on their native platform."


Ah, now THIS is intresting.

OS might be a big deal for you or me. But for my son it's inconsequential. He's as happy on Linux as he is on Mac, or iOS, or Windows. Evolution is strong.

Besides, since I've long been around the retail world, I see price as a pretty artificial thing in all senses. Back in the dawn of my working life I produced radio ads for a local stereo shop. There I learned about price targets. To satisfy the most customers, you wanted products in pricing tiers. Perhaps $299, 399, and 499.

There were customers for each. But back then dealing in physical products, one kinda had to differentiate the products either by features or caché. The expensive product, while basically the same, had all the circuitry of it's less expensive cousin, but more holes drilled and more switches and nobs to provide more user options and controls along with perhaps a beefier power supply or amplifier section.

Today, what ARE the differentiators between the zillion lines of code that makes up Premier verses the zillion lines of code that make up FCP-X?

Certainly nothing that impacts price in a realistic sense.

If Apple sells their code in one bucket for $299 and Adobe sells more varied code packages in six buckets for $1200 - what is it that makes one approach more valuable than the other? Theres literally not much tangible difference in the quantity or in the production costs of the deliverable. A bigger production or sales team here - whether or not you're licensing code or paying royalties there - that's about it.

The product is just software. Experessions of ideas about arrangement and interface. Isn't the rest mostly just "perceptions" about the utility of one approach over the other? X does function A fast. Premier does function B better . And I carefully say PERCEPTIONS of utility after significant thought. Because while there's a lot of hue and cry about this feature or workflow or that one - few here would argue that given a hard drive of the same content, either one of us working in our favorite NLE couldn't come up with an EXACT duplicate of a finished program someone told us to re-create.

The whole NLE debate sometimes makes me get flashes of the Microphone debates I occasionally get caught up in as a 30 year professional VO guy and narrator.

The truth is that the Mic is pretty far down the list of important tools I use when I do a VO. Actually not even in the top 5. Yeah, I own a $1000 mic because at the time I bought it, I could easily justify buying a tool that put the "mic quality" issue out of my own mental debate. But when I'm on the road, and a client needs a quick tag for the existing spots? I use other mics and recording processes out of my suitcase and nobody ever notices.

Discovering FCP-X for me has been a little like recording my first national level VO on my Zoom H4n -rather than through the recording chain into ProTools back in my studio.

Simpler and easier and nobody could really detect a difference at the ad agnecy or on the air.

So my thinking for so many years that the ONE "proper" way to do VO work was in a studio with classic tools was ripe for change.

Before I learned X, I had no clue that range based keywording built into my edit interface would transform my whole approach to my work.

But now I value Favorite/Reject +keyword software database access WAY MORE than tracks. It's hands down, no contest. And I didn't know they'd be so damn useful until I had them and could spend a good year developing a system for using them with intent.

Just as in my VO practice where I want to be able to do them as easily from a hotel room in San Diego as in my studio in Scottsdale - the new tools have changed how I operate.

So Chris, the answer is that everyone has to decide on the type of tools that makes them happy. And it's not any ONE thing - it's everything in sum. How features and price and payment model and COMFORT all mix together.

How I feel about it anyway.

FWIW.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 10:27:55 pm

[Bill Davis] "OS might be a big deal for you or me. But for my son it's inconsequential. He's as happy on Linux as he is on Mac, or iOS, or Windows. Evolution is strong.
"


Not my point. I started on some flavor of CP/M and have used some form of everything else, from DOS to GEOS to UNIX to Windows to OS X. My point is that people who own a Windows machine, and want to toss a DIY video up on the tubes, might possibly not be interested in going out to buy a whole new computer just to do so.



Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 9:31:38 pm

[Bill Davis] "The competitive video world of the net is clearly a place of 1 to 5 minute "information and entertainment blocks" served up on demand. That's what that market wants. And when I need to figure out quickly how to change a tail light on my car, or want to personally hear what a thought leader said yesterday, its a system that satisfies it's audience far better than appointment viewing.

Competitive for what? How many views (and how much money) does a 2 minute tutorial video on replacing a car's head lamp generate? There's a company (can't remember the name off hand) that's one of the 'how to' video kings and they pay something like $100 for each finished video. Great for them, not so great for the people making the videos. The market may want to watch a video of goats laughing to kill a few minutes at work but the market will not pay for it. Charlie Bit my Finger? Hilarious... when its free. Put YT behind a paywall and watch it's numbers crash instantly. Views without monetization is like a store with high foot traffic but barely any sales. Monetization, not popularity, pays the bills.


The bottom line is that I respect the production and post traditions we all grew up in. But the industry (and more, the market!) is evolving fast. And in a garden experiencing fast growth, weeding and re-planting can be as critical as initial plant selection."

Many reports have pegged Netflix as the single largest bandwidth hog in North America at 30% of total internet traffic. YT is at 10%. YT completely dwarfs Hulu when it comes to viewers but Hulu became profitable w/in 2 or 3 years of launch. People watch YT for minutes and other services for hours. YT, Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, etc., are all starting to create original, premium content because viewers and/or advertisers will pay to support it. YT's problem obviously isn't a lack of traffic, it's a lack of traffic that can be monetized and, unlike in b'cast where transmissions are basically a fixed cost, every viewer eats up resources and counts against the bottom line of a streaming service.


In 2005-ish I started working for an established website helping to produce their orignal content and while a some parts of the production pipeline were new I think most things were basically the same compared to the broadcast and cable work I'd done. In 2011 an indie doc I cut called Looking for Lenny (about the comedian Lenny Bruce) got domestic distribution on VOD and streaming and possibly in years past it would've just sat on a shelf gathering dust. I'm certainly aware of the changes taking place but in the end I don't think the landscape will look nearly as different as the internet echo chamber (which I know I'm part of) thinks it will.

I remember back in '99, at the height of Napster, people saying this would be the death of the major labels and artist's would just directly sell to fans online. Well, it's 2013 and the major labels are still around. Sure the field has opened up some but the majors are still the majors and artists are largely still struggling to get their fair share whether it's from CD sales, iTunes downloads or Spotify royalties.

In old Hollywood stars rebelled against their studio contracts and a number of decades later there is similar insurrection in the digital age.

"YouTube Stars Fight Back: Machinima and Maker Studios, two of YouTube's most high-profile networks, have come under fire from their own talent"

http://www.laweekly.com/2013-01-10/news/machinima-maker-studios-YouTube/ful...


Even some people that were on the cutting edge of new media a couple of years ago aren't as enamored with it as they once were. Trent Reznor, who had a famous and bloody fallout with his old label, even concedes that labels do some things right and has partnered with Columbia on his current project.

"Radiohead, Nine Inch Nails, and other digital pioneers sour on 'pay what you want' music"

http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/4/4054634/musics-pay-what-you-want-pioneers-...


The names of the gate keepers and money men might change but they won't disappear because they provide services that both content creators and content consumers need.


Meet the new boss, pretty much the same as the old boss. ;)




Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 10:17:51 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Views without monetization is like a store with high foot traffic but barely any sales. Monetization, not popularity, pays the bills."

Tell that to Psy.

Somebody figured out there would be a path between the ability to attract human eyeballs and monitization. It's not as direct as Broadcast through Neilson ratings through Ad Agnecies to Corporate Adveritising coffers, but it wasn't all that direct in the early TV era either.

I dont think Psy's hurting financially. Or Justin Bieber or any of the other modern content creators who've struck it big via early internet fame.

Sure the also leverage other media. They'd be idiots NOT to. But you can mock the "dancing cat" crowd all you like - I see EXACTLY those same clips played day after day on the Today Show - Good Morning America, and the other "traditional" broadcast outlets as much as I see them on the internet.

And they GET to network TV because they're popularized on the web.

If you can't see the value in that, you're beyond blind.

Again it happened yesterday. My wife came back from taping her local TV segment for Monday to report that once again she had a chat with this years smart and and beautiful and telegenic young intern who's been at the station through a program with the Walter Cronkite Journalism school at ASU and who is about at the end of her internship. My wife mentioned that once again, for the 3rd year in a row, that young lady is NOT looking to get into TV. She's after a career in "digital media" on the web.

For me, that's game over right there.

If traditional media is losing the contest to bait the best and brightest of our young men and women into TVs ranks, what kind of future is this industry possible building?

Honestly?

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 10:34:00 pm

[Bill Davis] "If you can't see the value in that, you're beyond blind."

I think you are blind if you can't see that it just isn't a "one or the other" or "one verses the other" scenario.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 12:04:10 am

Psy was on a label for a decade prior to going viral on YT and Justin Bieber got 'discovered' singing covers on YT and then got signed to a label. YT success stories like iJustine, FreddieW or Angry Orange (if you want to go old school) would be better examples of what you are looking for.


How much money do the people that up load the cat videos get paid? How much does YT earn on cat videos? How much does it cost YT to host and stream cat videos? Value in viewers? Sure. As long as you can turn that directly or indirectly into monetization. Assuming you are running a business of course and want to do things like pay your cast, crew, put gas in the car, etc.,. If you are working a day job and uploading cat videos as a hobby then it's a different story. I'm going to work under the assumption that YT's old business model wasn't cutting it which is why they are switching to pushing premium channels, original content and are considering putting premium content behind a pay wall. Again, all the major streaming players are developing original premium content so there must be a reason for it.

What's funny is along w/traditional media I've been involved in new media content creation and distribution for the better part of a decade and yer telling me I'm blind to what's going on. I've sat in on more than one meeting where the gist was "okay, we have a healthy online community, our audience continues to grow but how do we monetize them so we can keep the lights on?" Again, being popular isn't the same thing as running a successful business.

Digital Media? Traditional networks/studios/media corporations already have digital wings. If you don't think that the old media players are involved (and will become more involved) in new media then you should take another look around. Let's not forget that CBS, NBC and ABC started out as radio networks before they became TV networks. You know what most of my content creation friends in digital media want to do? Get a traditional media gig because they pay a whole hell of a lot more, lol. On a more serious note, many of them are fine with being paid less because they are working in content niches they enjoy and that don't really exist in traditional media.

Are things changing? Of course they are and the change has been fast & furious since the DV revolution kicked off in the late 90's/early 00's. I'm not saying that things aren't changing. I'm saying that we shouldn't expect wholesale change to the big picture and that new media creates new opportunities as well as new problems.

Feel free to think I'm cynical, jaded, blind or whatever but I've grown up in the middle of all this change and I'm beyond the 'wow it's shiny and new' honeymoon phase. I'm in the brass tacks, how do I make a living in new media phase (no, praying for viral success is not a sound business model) and the more I dig into that aspect of it, the more I dissect the success of others, the more similarities I see between old and new. Old and new players will co-exist for a long time and, IMO, most likely merge as opposed to one 'killing' the other.




Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 12:11:28 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Digital Media? Traditional networks/studios/media corporations already have digital wings. "

This is true even at the local level. Many TV stations have very active and profitable websites that feature both repurposed and unique content. They also produce custom web-only content for some of their local clients. I'm freelancing at one station this month and guess what, the same folks produce the web content as do the on-air content. In this case, using Varicams, studio shoots, FCP 7, PPro and After Effects.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 1:27:33 am

[Oliver Peters] "This is true even at the local level. Many TV stations have very active and profitable websites that feature both repurposed and unique content. They also produce custom web-only content for some of their local clients. I'm freelancing at one station this month and guess what, the same folks produce the web content as do the on-air content. In this case, using Varicams, studio shoots, FCP 7, PPro and After Effects."

I dunno. Personally I don't think I know a single person under 25 that "subscribes" to - or regularly surfs - any local TV station web presence.

I agree the traditional media outlets are trying to leverate modern media. My wife writes and delivers web content for every show segment she appears in and the station religiously posts that content for viewers doing searches. But honestly,it's kind of used as an promotional after fact rather than a creative driver of views.

And that a big budget TV station would use the big budget tools they already have in house to produce their web content is only obvious. In grade school I had a friend who's dad ran a carpentry shop. When we had to build wooden Viking boat models for extra credit in history class his turned up clearly having gone through commercial planers and drill presses and shaping tools. You use what you have access to - and that says nothing about whether someone approaching the same task needs that level of equipment to do a good job.

My wife has a reasonable local fan base after appearing in more than 300 segments over the past seven years on local TV - with very loyal fans who look forward to her broadcast segments. Heck, hardly a week goes by without someone stopping her in our local stores to complement a segment she's done that they've watched. And I don't think I've seen a single interaction with one of those fans who struck me as under 30 and most of them are 40 plus.

Admittedly hers is the "stay at home" daytime largely female crowd that is the core audience for the show she appears on, but still, there are plenty of students and young wives and stay at home moms who are in her show's target demo.

I just doubt they're particularly TV oriented these days.

I actually hope I'm wrong about all this, because having a nice ratinings measured video content distribution system in place makes my whole business life easier - since I produce a good bit of ad related TV and Radio destined content. But I just don't see much growth in the under 30 prime demos around here.

But maybe TV is succeeding in building relationships with young viewers and I just don't see it.

As we say. Time will tell.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 2:43:10 am

[Oliver Peters] "This is true even at the local level. Many TV stations have very active and profitable websites that feature both repurposed and unique content. They also produce custom web-only content for some of their local clients. I'm freelancing at one station this month and guess what, the same folks produce the web content as do the on-air content. In this case, using Varicams, studio shoots, FCP 7, PPro and After Effects."

Many (most?) stations and networks do have what I call 'show support' content online. I was thinking more along the lines of CC Studios, which is the online original content arm of Comedy Central, or Cracked.com. Comedy Central is owned by Viacom and Cracked.com is owned by Sony. While not a traditional media conglomerate, Microsoft hired away a CBS TV exec last fall and has studio space in Santa Monica as they gear up to offer original, 1st party content on XboxLIVE.

While there is certainly more room for startups and niche players in the streaming age than in the b'cast age I don't expect the established players to roll over and die nor fade away. Also, judging by the success (and controversy) around hugely successful YT channels like Maker Studios and Machinima I expect many new media outlets to mirror the basic old media structure because it has benefits and it works.




Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 9:44:16 pm

[Bill Davis] "The competitive video world of the net is clearly a place of 1 to 5 minute "information and entertainment blocks" served up on demand. That's what that market wants."

I disagree. If you look at the successful content providers, they are actually following relatively standard "network" models and simply using the 'net as one of - both not the only - delivery vehicles.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 10:20:51 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I disagree. If you look at the successful content providers, they are actually following relatively standard "network" models and simply using the 'net as one of - both not the only - delivery ve"

See my post above referencing the intern that works at the TV station where my wife regularly appears as an on-air contributor for a long running local broadcast show.

That's the long game right there. And, IMO, TV isn't doing a very good job of winning it.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 10:27:57 pm

[Bill Davis] "See my post below referencing the intern that works at the TV station where my wife regularly appears as an on-air contributor for a long running local broadcast show."

I did. The intern simply bought into the hype and will likely make a fine barista. ;-)

Look, I'm not arguing that TV isn't changing. I am arguing that many of the folks in the so-called traditional media have a better handle on succeeding in the new media world than folks think. In the end, none of this matters to the core of FCP X's success, because I don't believe that X is any better (or worse) suited for this world than that of traditional post.

X is different. It suits one-man bands well. It can also suit others equally well with significant workflow rejiggering. That doesn't change with the media outlet involved. The same can be said for Adobe or Avid.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 11:11:09 pm

[Oliver Peters] "X is different. It suits one-man bands well. It can also suit others equally well with significant workflow rejiggering. That doesn't change with the media outlet involved. The same can be said for Adobe or Avid."

The only point you're making that I'll gently push back on is my firm conviction that the "others" who you imply it does NOT suite well - have needs that are typically pretty "niche" in the overall scheme of video production and delivery in the modern world.

My contention is that for content creation and delivery for about a solid 90% of the video that gets delivered today across all modes and means and deployments - there is absolutely NOTHING about the current X workflow that isn't accommodated by it's current toolset. With absolutely no "re-jiggering" necessary at all.

Most of the aforementioned "re-jiggering" is done by people who have an established workflow that they have decided is is either impossible (some) difficult (more) or uncomfortable (most) to change in order to adopt the toolset built into X successfully.

Just as guys like Chris and Herb regularly challenge me with the contention that everything X can do - other editing software can also do - I keep asking people to give me examples of what X 'cannot" do - that the average professional editor regularly needs to do - which seems to me a more important metric for any package attempting to find a place in a working editors toolbox. The answers so far have been things I don't actually need to do. So I'm OK, I guess.

This does not address that other workflows or other needs aren't important or imply that they're not reason enough to choose a different tool.

Just that I can't understand the constant need to push AWAY from X, when it has it's own unique efficiencies like all the other compeitors.

Is is STILL the "we're angry you messed with our favorite tool" thing? IF so, wow. Grudges about things can run as deep as those about people, I suppose. Something I don't think about very much.

FWIW.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 4, 2013 at 11:27:32 pm

[Bill Davis] "Just that I can't understand the constant need to push AWAY from X, when it has it's own unique efficiencies like all the other compeitors.

Is is STILL the "we're angry you messed with our favorite tool" thing? IF so, wow. Grudges about things can run as deep as those about people, I suppose. Something I don't think about very much.
"


This is far more in your head, than any actual reality. I don't know of anybody who posts here who doesn't recognize that X has its strengths and value. For me, the fact is that two years after its release it still doesn't do everything I need it to. I also get that its not aimed at what I do, and there are things I admire about it.

And grudge? Would I have preferred to have spent some of the time I spent over the last two years retooling on something else? No doubt. Did I get something from doing it? Quite a bit. Do I believe that Apple still has as part of its core thinking that famous four-compartment square that Jobs drew up on his return to Apple? No. I think that's gone. But grudge? Hardly.


Return to posts index

Paul Neumann
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 4:35:30 am

So my kids are 10 and 12 and they do most of their video consumption through streaming on a device (phone, tablet or computer) or on-demand through the TV. They don't even ask us to record things for them anymore.

They are OS agnostic. We have MacBooks, an iPad, Android tablets, Android phones, Windows desktop, wii, PS3 and FiOS. These are all things they operate equally well and with no frustration if one doesn't work right. They just move on to the next one to get to what they want. And good for them I say. They will never sit on a 3 hour call with Tech Support trying to get a printer to work.

They seem to know that most of the crap they watch on YT is crap given its production values (I'll take all the credit here by all the amazingly, brilliant, stunning and flawlessly perfect editorial work of mine... that I FORCE them to watch :)). But the YT stuff is funny, and they don't have any money anyway so who cares?

Now one of my best clients is a family owned chain of health food stores. 90% of what I do for them is for their website. But what drives the content is...a TV show. Dr. Oz. Man, if that guy talks about it you can be sure the stores will be full of people asking for it immediately after it. So we have his program schedule in advance and get stories/interviews/how-to's ready in advance whenever we can.

And we also run spots on his show. I cut these in PPro. I export them directly to the station's FTP with custom specs (picky bastards). So, how's that? TV drives what we do on the web and our presence on the TV is more like posting on the web than ever before.

The kids are alright.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 4:55:04 am

[Paul Neumann] "The kids are alright."

Indeed. My fourteen year old and I are about to watch Doctor Who, as it plays in its proper time slot because its an event for us, then we'll watch Warehouse 13 as a download from iTunes. Then, she will no doubt retire to join other nerd fighters and watch her favorite youtube podcast by the Vlogbrothers, while I catch up with Game of Thrones, on Demand. Or maybe I'll pop over to Lynda and do a little Premiere polishing.

S'all Good, man.


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 6, 2013 at 4:22:55 am

[Chris Harlan] "My fourteen year old and I are about to watch Doctor Who, as it plays in its proper time slot because its an event for us"

Hey Chris majorly OT, but what ep are you up to over there? Is it the same as the ones airing in the UK now?

Are you a post 2005 fan or were you into the classic series as well?

Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 6, 2013 at 1:49:07 pm

[Alex Hawkins] "[Chris Harlan] "My fourteen year old and I are about to watch Doctor Who, as it plays in its proper time slot because its an event for us"

Hey Chris majorly OT, but what ep are you up to over there? Is it the same as the ones airing in the UK now?

Are you a post 2005 fan or were you into the classic series as well?
"


The Doctor is never OT. We just saw something set back in the 1890's at a Wellville-from-Hell establishment with the lizard lady and the potato-headed warrior dude. If my daughter was close at hand, she could tell you the name of the episode, as well as shame me for not knowing the names of the galactic races that the two aforementioned characters belong to.

Well, when I was a kid I used to be a big fan of the 4th doctor. We got reruns of him of him on weekends, over here on PBS. T'was a blast. And it has been an even greater blast to share Doctors 9-11 with my daughter. I fear the quality is ebbing a bit this season, but the new companion is a sweetie.


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 7, 2013 at 3:50:50 am

Chris, tut tut!

"The Crimson Horror" and I believe Madame Vastra is a Silurian and Strax is a Sontaran.

I reckon the new series peaked at the end of Season 3 with Last Of the Time Lords. It's been a slow downhill trend for me since then. Go back and have a look at some of those earlier eps like Girl in the Fireplace, Blink, Father's Day, not to mention the good old 2 parters (what's happened to them?).

I think Moffat's all over the map frankly (too much pseudo clever timey wimey stuff) and I have a distinct aversion to Matt Smith I'm afraid. He keeps looking at the camera when he's not supposed to. Check it out.

Yes, Clara's nice to look at though, even if I'm not sure what her use is.

Tom Baker was definitely the best. And those stories were great back then. Good solid sci fi stuff. Imaginative and interesting. Unfortunately a sneeze used to make the sets wobble.

Oh well.

Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 7, 2013 at 4:05:34 am

[Alex Hawkins] "Chris, tut tut!

"The Crimson Horror" and I believe Madame Vastra is a Silurian and Strax is a Sontaran.
"


Bravo!


[Alex Hawkins] "I reckon the new series peaked at the end of Season 3 with Last Of the Time Lords. It's been a slow downhill trend for me since then. Go back and have a look at some of those earlier eps like Girl in the Fireplace, Blink, Father's Day, not to mention the good old 2 parters (what's happened to them?)."

Yes! The two parters! I wonder that, as well. And, I can still make my sister's skin crawl by asking her, in just the right voice, "Are you my mommy?" Of those, the Library episodes might be my favorite. I'm a Tennant fan, and like Eccleston, too. Smith is okay, but yes, a bit too much mugging. I did like the whole Silence arc, and "Let's Kill Hitler" was a blast.

[Alex Hawkins] "Tom Baker was definitely the best. And those stories were great back then. Good solid sci fi stuff. Imaginative and interesting. Unfortunately a sneeze used to make the sets wobble."

And death rays fx came out as solid green lines.


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 7, 2013 at 4:58:00 am

Sorry, last Who post.

[Chris Harlan] "Yes! The two parters! I wonder that, as well. And, I can still make my sister's skin crawl by asking her, in just the right voice, "Are you my mommy?" Of those, the Library episodes might be my favorite"

Yes I loved both of them. You see, Steven Moffatt wrote them both. Great stories. (And the Library one had the all time best Dr Who ending I reckon.) But as an EP of the show?

Meh! Not so good.

Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 7, 2013 at 5:01:17 am

[Alex Hawkins] "But as an EP of the show?

Meh! Not so good.
"


Yeah. I agree. Though, my daughter really agrees. She occasionally uses Moffat as a swear word.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 1:12:54 pm

Lots of debate on whether FCPX really has a "unique" edge on creation and delivery in the new distribution age so I'll just add directly to Bill's initial post.

At the moment, FCPX biggest failing in the above regard is that, for a company that seems to be touting file based delivery, Compressor is very weak. It has a very poor H.264 codec and extremely limited access to codec tweaks whether .mov or .mp4. It can't create a High Profile CABAC encode at all.

While they've made some improvements to QMaster, it still can't match the simple clustering of multiple machines that Telestream Episode can.

For a company that supports HLS adaptive bit rate, there's no easy way to create the files and playlist in Compressor.

On the other hand, I suspect Apple has some improvements in mind as part of their "10 year plan" for FCPX but admittedly haven't seen any evidence of it yet. The real promise though is abstract in that since Apple was very willing to rethink the NLE, they may have an equally interesting rethink on file delivery. I wouldn't be surprised that FCPX's metadata/database handling will have some role in that. I can't really debate this since it's just my own subjective hunch.



Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 4:31:18 pm

[Craig Seeman] "At the moment, FCPX biggest failing in the above regard is that, for a company that seems to be touting file based delivery, Compressor is very weak. It has a very poor H.264 codec and extremely limited access to codec tweaks whether .mov or .mp4. It can't create a High Profile CABAC encode at all.
"


Maybe they think 'high level' compression is a void best filled by third parties (same as tape layoff)? Apple's history with post is certainly enigmatic with regards to how deep down the post production rabbit whole they want to go. Apple's experiments, for lack of a better term, with Shake, Color and Final Cut Server all initially got people excited about how Apple could bring it's 'magic' to those areas only to see Apple let the apps hither and die.

Time will tell.




Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 5, 2013 at 5:10:56 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Maybe they think 'high level' compression is a void best filled by third parties (same as tape layoff)?"

Apple has little interest in tape though since it's "dead" as far as they're concerned. In the long run it is as I don't doubt HDCAM delivery will decline even if it takes some time.

On the other hand FCPX can export to YouTube and Vimeo but can't export using High Profile which they would accept. Even recent iOS devices can handle High Profile. In other words, Apple isn't even taking advantage of the best of its own ecosystem. That's why I find this an issue.

An additional irony as that so many people who do like FCPX point out how fast they feel it is (even if it's just subjective). Yet, encoding through FCPX or Compressor still isn't all that fast and the clustering features that those who own multiple Macs would take advantage of to speed export, is not easy to implement. Granted some aspects have improved with GPU use during export but that's only one of several things they need to improve for file delivery to complement perceived or real editing speed.



Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV... just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days...
on May 6, 2013 at 1:31:47 am

Getting FCPX out the door and up to snuff is certainly ProApps priority number one so maybe we'll see a totally new Compressor down the line. Apple is known for shifting team members around as needed instead of bringing on new employes so X might be taking up too many resources currently for the 'supporting apps' to get much attention.

Who knows.

I guess I'm saying given Apple's history I wouldn't be surprised if they left Compressor deficient in this respect even though it would appear to go against the grain of their tapeless world philosophy.




Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]