MediaCollege.com Blog

MediaCollege.com on YouTube

Dave — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:17:02 GMT

At last I've made a start on our YouTube channel. It's a very slow start, but it's a start.

One of the reasons I've been putting this off is that I really don't like being in front of the camera. I'll take just about any position behind the camera but I can't get happy in front of it. Still, we can't (yet) afford a professional presenter so for now you're stuck with me fronting the videos.

You can subscribe to the channel at www.youtube.com/user/MediaCollege.

Editors Keys

Dave — Mon, 24 May 2010 00:57:56 GMT

This week we're taking a look at an interesting company called EditorsKeys.com. They're the company behind those coloured shortcut keyboards you may have seen in studios all around the country.

Editors Keys specialise in shortcut keyboards for a range of programs such as Avid, Final Cut, Premiere, Pro Tools and Photoshop. The company offers a guarantee that if the shortcut keyboards don't speed up your editing by up to 40%, they'll offer a full money back promise! They work by showing all of the keyboard shortcuts on your keyboard to save you time trailing through all the menus and tool bars.

More interestingly they've just launched a range of recording gear which includes new studio quality USB Microphones and portable vocal booths to help record some great voiceovers in your home studio.

I've just received some keyboard sets in the mail (see photo below) and I'll try to have a go with them ASAP. We've requested some more products from the company, so look out for a review coming soon!

For more information check out the link below:
http://www.editorskeys.com

Attached Images

Free Video Background Loops

Dave — Wed, 05 May 2010 01:10:27 GMT

Recently I received a selection of video background loops from a company called Footage Firm. The videos are well-made and come on DVD with both SD and HD versions. Footage Firm is running a free giveaway promotion where all you have to pay is the postage and they'll send you the DVDs free. I doubt whether you'll find a better deal than that, so check it out here: Free Video Backgrounds

Media Personality Profiles

Dave — Sat, 01 May 2010 00:04:16 GMT

In what we hope is the start of an ongoing series, we're introducing a new "Industry Profiles" section featuring interviews with successful media personalities. If you want to know what it's like to be a radio host, a video game designer or a TV program developer, check it out. Over time we hope to add many more interviews, providing lots of variety and interesting insights into different types of media careers.

Thanks to our new contract writer Antonia Anderson for conducting and compiling these interviews.

www.mediacollege.com/profile

Free Music Files

Dave — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 09:59:52 GMT

New to our download section is a small selection of free music downloads. We've only got a couple of tracks so far (with several versions each), but if there's enough interest we'll look at commissioning more soon.

We're paying a local muso to compose and record these files, so:
(1) Feel free to make a donation.
(2) If you think you can do better and you'd like to contribute, please contact us.

Does 3-D Affect Your Health?

Dave — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 04:36:43 GMT

We've seen the 3-D hype, now we're moving into the backlash phase. More and more people are expressing concern/indignation about the onslaught of 3-D content.

Typical is this article from CNN that worries about short and long-term health effects of watching 3-D. There are some good points made, especially the fact that we really don't know what effect prolonged 3-D exposure has since people have traditionally only watched the duration of a movie in one sitting.

Also significant is the trend of 3-D hardware manufacturers to add health warnings to their products. Samsung's warnings about epileptic seizures, stroke, motion sickness, perceptual after-effects, disorientation, eye strain and decreased postural stability sound ominous indeed. However it's probably safe to assume that the warnings are based on worst-case speculation as much as actual research, in order to mitigate against any possible legal action in future.

If 3-D is to progress, this is a topic that needs to be investigated. Hopefully the major manufacturers will see the benefit of getting the research underway as soon as possible so this won't drag on forever.

RIP Margaret Moth

Dave — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 02:01:08 GMT

Internationally renowned photojournalist Margaret Moth (Wikipedia page) has died of cancer aged 59.

She initially wanted to be a mechanic but could not get an apprenticeship.

Instead she became New Zealand's first female television news camera operator.

Wanted to change her name to Tiger Moth but wasn't allowed.

Covered the Persian Gulf War, the rioting that followed Indira Gandhi's assassination, the civil war in Tbilisi, Georgia, and the war in Sarajevo.

Almost killed (and lost much of her face) when she was shot in the face covering the war in Sarajevo in 1992.

A fearless skydiver and an enthusiastic bell ringer.

Quote: Margaret Moth

I would have liked to have gone out with a bit more flair but I feel I can die with dignity. I don't think it matters how long you live, so long as you can say: 'I've got everything out of life'.

What's So Great About 24P?

Dave — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 22:29:56 GMT

24P means 24 frames per second, which is the traditional frame rate for film. It's lower than modern video but many videomakers choose to use it because they like the effect.

If, like me, you wonder why anyone would purposely downgrade their video in this manner, you might like to watch this video from MacVideo.tv in which respected filmmaker Stu Maschwitz makes the case for 24P. It takes him a long 10 minutes but it's very eloquent and one of the best explanations I've ever heard. In essence he's saying it's an artistic choice similar to other techniques that involve removing information. He wants the audience to work to experience the narrative, and he feels that providing "too much information" is undesirable.

It's a compelling argument but I don't buy it.

First of all I'll quickly address the test audiences cited by Stu: I'd like to see the same tests done with randomized audiences in a genuine double-blind test where people are immune to group-think (would you cheer a film in a room full of filmmakers who were booing it?). These anecdotal examples don't convince me of anything.

To be honest I've always had a bit of a smug attitude about 24P. I can't help thinking the real attraction is nostalgia - 24P looks like the films you loved as a child. It's also a way for film students to pretend they have some special artistic insight that lets them appreciate film in ways that normal people can't.

Sure there are cases where 24P looks great, in the same way that some films work well in black and white. That doesn't mean that all films should be B&W, or that B&W is inherently more artistic than colour.

My strongest reaction to 24P was in the first scene of Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. I had two reactions to that scene: The first was the enormity of the world Peter Jackson had created. The second was that I couldn't follow the action for all the flickering. I was almost overcome with sympathy for filmmakers restricted by this archaic frame rate. I was trying my best to immerse myself in Middle Earth but I kept getting pulled back to reality by the horrible stuttering pseudo-motion of 24fps.

To me it's important to feel that I'm part of a movie. A lot of effort goes towards achieving that effect, from continuity specialists to colour-correctors all working to keep the illusion intact. When I watch a film the cinema has a big screen, the room is dark, the sound surrounds me, other people (should) stay quiet, and the whole thing is set up to keep me in the alternate reality.

Anything that yanks me from the world of the movie to the real world is annoying, and 24P does exactly that - it reminds me that I'm watching a film and this isn't real. It's like seeing a boom mic in shot.

Stu Maschwitz feels that super-smooth motion is too much information, and that films shouldn't be too realistic. I say that if the same logic was used by all filmmakers, we'd still be watching 16fps, 4x3 black & white movies with no sound.

Filmmakers would generally agree that for most projects, creating a realistic-looking environment is desirable. We have the technology to do it. Let's not deny ourselves the opportunity by staying stuck in the past. Many people thought that "talkies" heralded the end of artistic filmmaking. They were wrong, and so are those who resist better frame rates.

60P for me thanks!

The Future of Flash Video

Dave — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:14:52 GMT

Whenever I get the chance (like now) I like to boast about how I predicted the success of Flash video back when it was widely considered a non-starter. As soon as it was possible to construct a viable Flash player I did so. My first attempt was in Flash 5 and it eventually became the MC Media Player. Unfortunately I wasn't aggressive enough with my development or marketing (and my mediocre coding skills probably didn't help), so I watched as others took the idea much further and did much better than I did. I cry when I think about it. But that's another story.

Importantly, my faith in Flash had nothing to do with video quality. Flash was a dramatic improvement for webmasters - it allowed us to easily add a single video player that worked equally well on all major platforms. It also provided much more flexibility and customization options than any other format. Of course, to succeed it also had to be better for end users and it was - videos just appeared on the web page and users no longer needed to care about formats and plugins.

In short, the player is more important than the video quality.

Of course Flash went on to became the dominant web video format, thanks largely to support from sites such as Youtube. The old days of the "big three" being Windows Media, Quicktime and Real Media are ancient history.

Now, in 2010 I find myself having come full circle and wondering if Flash video is nearing the end of its era. This time I'm not in the minority though and here's why...

Flash is proprietary. This isn't a show-stopper (most other major web formats are proprietary) but it does attract a lot of resistance from both open-source advocates and commercial competitors. No-one likes paying licence fees and free alternatives obviously have an advantage. This will become more of an issue with HTML5...

HTML5 is coming. Most of the big browsers are backing HTML5, which was originally planned to include a standardized video specification. Unfortunately no suitable codec was settled upon and HTML5 is going ahead, at least for now, without defining a specific video format. However it does include a element that allows embedded videos without the hassle of using a player (as you have to with Flash video). The player is instead built using HTML and CSS.

When it comes to video, HTML is moving towards more standards-compliance with a strong preference for open-source/patent-free. That's not good for Flash, WinMedia, Quicktime or any of the others.

Google likes HTML5 and open source, and has moved into the video codec business. Google now owns On2, the company behind many successful video codecs (ironically including VP6 - the codec that was adopted by Adobe and made Flash video what it is).

Interestingly, back in 2001 On2 released their VP3 codec as open-source after losing a battle against H.264. VP3 went on to become one of the current leading open-source video formats in OGG/Theora, and is currently the leading open-source option for HTML5. There has also been some speculation about Flash supporting OGG and a few interesting projects to make it happen.

Anyway, I think it's reasonable to expect Google to start using its own codec on YouTube with HTML5 (supported by Chrome and maybe other browsers). I also expect Google to release a codec (e.g. VP8) as open-source in the hope that it will do better than Theora and be accepted into the HTML5 spec. If that happens it's hard to imagine how Adobe/Flash could respond. They will certainly need to include support for the codec in Flash. Perhaps Adobe's best strategy is to forget about promoting their own preferred formats (flv, f4v, etc) and instead concentrate on providing a platform to make advanced players. To some extent they've already done this by supporting H.264. In future, webmasters who want a simple option can use the element; those who want bells and whistles in their video players can still use Flash.

However I'm not sure how far that approach can work either. I've had a look at YouTube's experimental HTML5 player and I'm impressed. At first glance it appears very similar to the Flash player and most users would probably not notice the change. Vimeo has also rolled out an HTML5 player which is virtually indistinguishable from the Flash version.

On the downside, video playback is a little shonky and the video quality often seems poor compared to Flash. However I think these are only a temporary problems.

Flash isn't welcome on iPhone, iPad & other devices. As if the situation wasn't already bad enough for Flash, there seems little hope that it will work on many mobile devices (some say impossible). That's a very serious problem for Flash, arguably the killing blow.

So in summary I think it's safe to say that Flash's native video formats (flv etc) are terminally ill. Flash is likely to remain an option for advanced webmasters needing customization beyond the capability of HTML5, or who want to keep their applications closed-source. For most webmasters though, HTML5 players will eventually become the standard way to deliver online video.

When will this happen? When Internet Explorer begins supporting the element. (The other big browsers already do.) There's still no official announcement from Microsoft but a launch target for IE9 should be announced in 2010. Although I wouldn't put anything past Microsoft, I don't think they can ignore the element, so I expect HTML5 video to gain a lot of momentum in the second half of 2010 and become the preferred option for most new applications in 2011.

Website Update, Feb 2010

Dave — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 03:37:46 GMT

It's been a busy week at MediaCollege.com. If you've visited the forum you'll have seen that we've had a major upgrade - you can read about it in this thread. I'm personally quite excited about the new possibilities.

The Newsroom is starting to take shape. So far I've posted a few quick stories to help get the system working and I'm still fine-tuning it. I'm aiming to post at least a few stories most weeks but we'll see how it goes.

We've been commissioning a few more articles and tutorials for the website. To be honest we're having trouble finding top-class writers who can write about electronic media production. If you think you have the chops to write for MediaCollege.com, let me know. We can only pay per-article on a part-time basis (we don't have enough money for full-time staff - yet). Please, only serious writers with a solid command of written English.

Here are a few recent examples from different writers:

Video:
Create a Video to Sell Your Home

Audio:
How to Prepare for Studio Recording with a Click-Track

Photography:
Quick tips for photographing a wedding

Computers:
Extend Your Wireless Internet Range
What is "virtualization"?
What is SQL?
What is XML?
Why Choose Linux?

The plan for 2010 is for me to be working pretty much full-time on MediaCollege.com. My first task will be to figure out where to go with the MC Media Player (any Flash video gurus out there?). After that, the next priority is to tidy and update parts of the website that are looking old and tired (big job). At the same time I'll be plugging away writing and commissioning new tutorials, so I hope to see a lot of development this year.

One area we want to develop is our YouTube channel (still empty so there's no point linking to it). I wanted to wait until we had a good system for easily posting Videos in the forum and newsroom. Now that we have it, look out for more video tutorials and other stuff.

The website is now averaging around 30,000 unique visitors per day. It goes from strength to strength and we're all very grateful to each and every one of you.

Cheers,
Dave

Google Employees Convicted in Italy

Dave — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 06:31:10 GMT

Italian Judge Oscar Magi has convicted three Google employees for privacy violation after an offensive video was posted to Google Video back in 2006. The employees did get away with six-month suspended sentences but the wider implications of the conviction are bound to create a tidal wave of consternation.

The convicted employees had absolutely nothing to do with the video. It was posted by a user who has since been convicted for the offence - thanks to assistance from Google. The Google employees didn't participate in the video, they didn't upload or even review it. They only became aware of its existence after it had been removed.

Apparently the Italian judiciary are intent on wiping out the disturbing trend of posting offensive videos online (they are currently pursuing similar cases against eBay, Yahoo and Facebook). Their strategy is obviously to target web hosts as well as the offending uploaders.

It's clear that services like YouTube and Facebook are completely untenable if the host can be held liable for user uploads. YouTube gets 20 hours of video uploaded per minute - there's simply no economic way to preview it. There are many other problems; for example, hosts would need to access private accounts to vet some material - resulting in the ironic act of breaking one privacy law in order to avoid breaking a different one.

It is unclear exactly whether Judge Oscar Magi understands this. If he does, his message to Google is clear: "Get out of our country". If the conviction stands I feel that Google will have no choice but to do exactly that.

In principle I applaud efforts to make the web safer. Here in New Zealand the judiciary is far too soft on Internet offenders. I'd like to see jail sentences for many web crimes that are currently attracting little more than wrist-slaps. I even support efforts to make hosts be as proactive as possible to keep the nasties at bay.

However, prosecuting hosts for users' actions is, as privacy consultant Richard Thomas put it, "like prosecuting the post office for hate mail that is sent in the post". It makes no sense and it shows a poor understanding of how the web works.

What we need is to put far more liability onto the end user. Shifting responsibility to hosts will only make a bad situation worse. Many (especially young) people think they don't need to be accountable online. We need to show them that they, and they alone, will reap the consequences of their unsavory online activities.

In an official blog post, Google says:

"If... every social network and any community bulletin board, are held responsible for vetting every single piece of content that is uploaded to them � every piece of text, every photo, every file, every video � then the Web as we know it will cease to exist, and many of the economic, social, political and technological benefits it brings could disappear."

I think they are actually understating the situation. Instead of saying "could disappear" I'd say "will definitely disappear".

I run several online forums. Imagine I'm a bad guy and I want to hurt my competitors. All I need to do is pay some flunky in Nigeria to upload porn to their forum. They get convicted and I magically overtake them in search engine rankings. That's just one of a hundred reasons that user-generated content will cease in any country that enforces laws in the way Italy has done.

So my question to the people of Italy is this: Do you want to keep services like YouTube, Facebook, Blogger, Flickr, Twitter, etc etc? The judiciary apparently says no.

It's your move.

When news balance isn't balanced

Dave — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:58:25 GMT

This morning I came across an article called 5 Things The Media Loves Pretending Are News (warning: course language). I particularly liked it because it mentions one of my biggest annoyances with news reporting: "Let's Ask the Idiots About Science".

All journalists are taught a basic principle of good reporting: Present both sides to any argument. If a politician presents a certain point of view, get an interview with an opposing politician who provides "balance". In theory this makes sure that the public gets all the necessary information to make a fair judgement. Of course it also encourages the age-old adversarial system in which opposition politicians are relegated to the role of complainer but that's another story.

Things get unstuck when there isn't really a valid opposing point of view, or when the "balance" isn't very balanced at all. If a scientist presents the results of a new study, it's perfectly acceptable to speak to other scientists who disagree or present alternative results. That's balance. It is not acceptable or desirable to speak to some unqualified conspiracy theorist with an innate distrust of science. Why not? Because it's not balanced. You have a weighty expert on one side being "balanced" by a lightweight amateur on the other side. Balanced output can only be achieved when there is balanced input.

Science reporting is one of the most seriously flawed areas of the news media. The article refers to the "-gate" phenomena which reminds me of "climate-gate", a terribly mis-represented and misleading ongoing news topic. We've heard from a thousand "climate change skeptics" (a misnomer if ever I heard one) but how many nobel prize-winng physicists have been quoted? If you want to know how and why scientists manipulate data, you won't get the true picture by doing a vox-pop survey in the street or by talking to people with a vested interest in denying climate change. Instead you need to do employ someone who understands the science environment to thoroughly analyze the situation.

Unfortunately that's not only difficult, expensive and time-consuming, but it makes for less dramatic news. Who wants to listen to some nerd explain that individual scientists do stupid things but science on the whole has procedures to counter data manipulation? Much more interesting to call it the climate-gate scandal.

And don't get me started on medicine. "Here's a new scientific study that shows homeopathy doesn't work, and here's a panel of scientists explaining how the results were determined. Now, for balance, here's a homeopath who says all scientists are wrong but doesn't have any evidence except some anecdotes. And we certainly won't mention the placebo effect."

I could go on all day but if you've read this far you deserve a rest. Thanks for listening. Feel free to provide some "balance" in the comments ;)

Happy Birthday Photoshop

Dave — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 06:09:30 GMT

This month Adobe Photoshop turns 20 years old. Here's an interesting look back at the history of this industry-changing application: http://www.webdesignerdepot.com/2010...obe-photoshop/

New Standard for TV Commercial Volume

Dave — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 01:42:56 GMT

Way back in October 2003 a message was posted in our forum asking why TV commercials seem louder than regular programming. It's a complicated situation and comments in the thread over the last six years have helped explain how it works and why it's taking so long to get anything done about it.

While I'm not getting too excited just yet, it is encouraging to see the International Telecommunication Union propose a technical standard on commercial volume limits. Essentially they have suggested a standard 'loudness meter' that helps define what is largely a subjective measurement (loudness cannot simply be measured in terms of volume or electrical signal strength).

Here in New Zealand there is some cause for optimism:

Quote: http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/3257760/TV-ads-may-get-quieter

Television New Zealand technology manager Peter Ennis says it is hard to define an objective standard for loudness, which is subjective. The ITU has been working on the problem for eight years and its endorsement of a standard is a breakthrough, he says. TVNZ is highly likely to adopt it, and will be talking to other broadcasters.

I expect that broadcasters will generally be receptive. Loud ads are unpopular but currently broadcasters have little choice but to show them. The new standard is likely to be as much of a headache cure for them as it is for consumers. Here's hoping.

Wedding Photo Gallery

Dave — Tue, 19 Jan 2010 03:47:25 GMT

We've just started a new section for wedding photography which includes a gallery of examples intended to provide inspiration for budding photographers. If you've got any spectacular wedding photos you'd like to share, please let me know. I'm looking for imaginative, original photos that depart from the standard shots. Remember the point is to suggest new ideas and innovative approaches to wedding photography.

In return you'll get credit and a link to your website (if you want it of course).