YouTube and the "you must use it" rule. at DVinfo.net

Mugurel Dragusin · October 20th, 2008, 11:09 PM

Hi!

Let me be short on this one: I don't agree with YouTube (or any video sharing/hosting website for that matter) to be mandatory beyond "must use any video sharing/hosting website".

Most of us, can and do offer SD, HD entries. Even SD, at it's full size, can be a pleasure to watch given it's not resized to the VCD res + compression that YouTube does. Their higher resolution it's still not HD. While one could argue that quality doesn't matter, it should not hold down those who can and want to offer the technical quality (which let's admit it, most of us can and do).

Most video sharing/hosting websites allow the playback of the HD content in SD, which brings us to the final line: There is no point in uploading to 2-3 websites when one can do it on a single website which can do both things, HD and SD (YouTube, doesn't, get beyond the so called hi-res mode, it's not HD).

Let's not forget also the fact that YouTube does not even go well with the 16:9 and similar aspect ratios.

I am therefore, requesting for the change the rules part of "We strongly request that one version of the film you submit be on Youtube" into "We strongly request that one version of the film you submit be on a video sharing/hosting website of your own choice...".

Pro, Contra? Voice it out, this is a forum :)

Lorinda Norton · October 20th, 2008, 11:55 PM

I think the answer lies within Chris Hurd's reply on this thread: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/dvd-web-v...-tube-one.html

You just have to be patient a little longer... :)

Giroud Francois · October 21st, 2008, 01:57 AM

unfortunately on internet, patience is not a virtue.
the winner is often the first, not the best.

Andris Krastins · October 21st, 2008, 03:23 AM

I can only agree that YouTube is terrible. SD videos look very fine on Vimeo, for example,
and HD won't make a film good if the content itself is bad.

Charles Papert · October 21st, 2008, 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giroud Francois

unfortunately on internet, patience is not a virtue.
the winner is often the first, not the best.

When it comes to hosting videos, I can't see why one would stick to the "first" host--you can always move your material to another site later if it offers an improvement. The "winner" is the end user, whose material is going to look the best if they bother to put it on the site that best presents it.

Oliver Pahlow · October 21st, 2008, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giroud Francois

the winner is often the first, not the best.

I did not realize this was a "who's first" contest. I don't know if that is a general opinion for this contest, but I think it is a wrong approach at looking at it.

Marc Burleigh · October 21st, 2008, 03:05 PM

Well, I'm all for living in the real world. With its compromises.

I can totally understand why the YouTube rule was set up. All the videos are in the same place, the website is tried and tested with the various browsers (IE, Mozilla, Firefox, Safari, Opera, etc), the compression means we're all on the same playing field where content is lording it over special adapters and expensive cameras, and having Google as its patron means it's going to be around for a long time with new features added to it so our videos are there for posterity.

That said, though, the argument for Vimeo is winning me over. Which I have to say is probably a bad thing, because I live in a place with distinctly un-broadband technology. Uploading full video files will be drearily time-consuming and prone to connection upsets.

But if I'm going to go the hours of effort to make a masterpiece of digital cinema (well, a sub-masterpiece given my paltry gear compared to the toys many of you guys have, but still a work of craft), I want it to reflect some of that in the theatre where it's going to be shown.

The new DVinfo video hosting facility sounds mouthwateringly good.

But until it's up and running, maybe we could consider Vimeo as the default site for this comp?

You all know the technical superiority of Vimeo over YouTube. But there's also another reason I think we turn up to that site more than Google's baby: the company is better. Any which way you browse or search on Vimeo and you find videos that inspire, educate and illustrate. It's a cradle of creativity, and the comments from the people who watch are worthy of the productions being seen. Which is all very different from the mountain of pirated Japanese animé, softcore stripping, ripped TV shows and skateboard stunts set to predictable music that YouTube throws up.

Vimeo is a class crowd. YouTube is a WalMart of derivation.

(But of course, in the interests of group solidarity and just getting any sort of audience pay-off for the work that will be done, I'll abide by whatever decision is made.... ;-)

Lorinda Norton · October 21st, 2008, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oliver Pahlow

I did not realize this was a "who's first" contest. I don't know if that is a general opinion for this contest, but I think it is a wrong approach at looking at it.

No one is looking at it that way, Oliver, and I hope you know differently. If you don't, you haven't been spending enough time checking out the DV Challenge.

Thank you, Marc, for the thoughtful views, pro and con, on the "why YouTube for DVC" question. At one time there was another reason for choosing YouTube--it was a way to get the movies "out there" to a much wider audience. Now it seems that Vimeo is catching up.

We've been here before and gone around in a circle: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/dv-challe...-hd-vimeo.html
At least this time the conversation seems to be going in a fairly straight line. If you hear a sound like two coconuts banging together that may be Dylan and I putting our heads together on this. Or it may be two coconuts... ;)

Dylan Couper · October 23rd, 2008, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mugurel Dragusin

I am therefore, requesting for the change the rules part of "We strongly request that one version of the film you submit be on Youtube" into "We strongly request that one version of the film you submit be on a video sharing/hosting website of your own choice...".

Here's the deal.

Although you care what your movie looks like, judging is based on factors such as: story, characters, acting, editing, sound and cinematography. It isn't based on compression.

The reason we picked youtube, is that there are a lot of annoying hosting sites out there. Bad compression won't hurt your chances, but us having to click through 7 links, wait 2 minutes, and/or watch a sponsored ad before your fill WILL.

The other beauty of Youtube is exposure, it offers traffic that no other video sharing site will match for years. People will find and watch your film. The destiny of a film is to be seen, after all.

I'll discuss with Lorinda about adding other options to the video sharing sites besides Youtube.

Which other ones would anyone suggest, and why?

Chris Barcellos · October 23rd, 2008, 10:08 AM

I notice most players post two or more links, giving a high def location like vimeo, or off their own server. In that way there is a choice for the view to go to. I find myself watching on YouTube first, for ease, and then if the film has some great cinematic qualities, I will try to track down a higher def version.

I see no reason why YouTube shouldn't continue as our main exposure, especially since YouTube is offering higher quality option now.

Vimeo is good, but I run into problems sometime with playback, that I can't quite pin down the cause for.

Dick Mays · October 23rd, 2008, 12:15 PM

The reason I like youtube, it it allows me to quickly watch ALL of the shorts in the competition. Frankly, if I had an 80M bye download for every short, I'd probably not watch them all.

The shorts i like, I watch again in high def if it is available.

Dylan Couper · October 24th, 2008, 10:52 PM

After a 3 day conference and 4 bottles of Scotch, Lorinda and I have came to a verdict...

Vimeo is an acceptible substitute if you don't want to post on Youtube.

Chris Barcellos · October 24th, 2008, 11:11 PM

That's what they should do to fix the economy, too.....

Lorinda Norton · October 25th, 2008, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

After a 3 day conference and 4 bottles of Scotch, Lorinda and I have came to a verdict...

Vimeo is an acceptible substitute if you don't want to post on Youtube.

...and please....no loud cheers. My head couldn't take it right now.
;)

Dick Mays · October 25th, 2008, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

After a 3 day conference and 4 bottles of Scotch, Lorinda and I have came to a verdict...

Three days and you only went through four bottles of scotch? No doubt Lorinda was not drinking her share...

October 20th, 2008, 11:09 PM	#1
Mugurel Dragusin Major Player Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Philippines Posts: 253	YouTube and the "you must use it" rule. Hi! Let me be short on this one: I don't agree with YouTube (or any video sharing/hosting website for that matter) to be mandatory beyond "must use any video sharing/hosting website". Most of us, can and do offer SD, HD entries. Even SD, at it's full size, can be a pleasure to watch given it's not resized to the VCD res + compression that YouTube does. Their higher resolution it's still not HD. While one could argue that quality doesn't matter, it should not hold down those who can and want to offer the technical quality (which let's admit it, most of us can and do). Most video sharing/hosting websites allow the playback of the HD content in SD, which brings us to the final line: There is no point in uploading to 2-3 websites when one can do it on a single website which can do both things, HD and SD (YouTube, doesn't, get beyond the so called hi-res mode, it's not HD). Let's not forget also the fact that YouTube does not even go well with the 16:9 and similar aspect ratios. I am therefore, requesting for the change the rules part of "We strongly request that one version of the film you submit be on Youtube" into "We strongly request that one version of the film you submit be on a video sharing/hosting website of your own choice...". Pro, Contra? Voice it out, this is a forum :) __________________ Lost signature, if you find it, please return it to me, thank you.

October 20th, 2008, 11:55 PM	#2
Lorinda Norton Wrangler Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Southwest Idaho, USA Posts: 3,066	I think the answer lies within Chris Hurd's reply on this thread: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/dvd-web-v...-tube-one.html You just have to be patient a little longer... :) __________________ Lorinda

October 23rd, 2008, 10:08 AM	#10
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	I notice most players post two or more links, giving a high def location like vimeo, or off their own server. In that way there is a choice for the view to go to. I find myself watching on YouTube first, for ease, and then if the film has some great cinematic qualities, I will try to track down a higher def version. I see no reason why YouTube shouldn't continue as our main exposure, especially since YouTube is offering higher quality option now. Vimeo is good, but I run into problems sometime with playback, that I can't quite pin down the cause for. __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

October 24th, 2008, 10:52 PM	#12
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	After a 3 day conference and 4 bottles of Scotch, Lorinda and I have came to a verdict... Vimeo is an acceptible substitute if you don't want to post on Youtube. __________________ Need to rent camera gear in Vancouver BC? Check me out at camerarentalsvancouver.com

October 24th, 2008, 11:11 PM	#13
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	That's what they should do to fix the economy, too..... __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

October 21st, 2008, 01:57 AM	#3
Giroud Francois Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: switzerland Posts: 2,133	unfortunately on internet, patience is not a virtue. the winner is often the first, not the best.

October 21st, 2008, 03:23 AM	#4
Andris Krastins Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Lielvārde, Latvia Posts: 326	I can only agree that YouTube is terrible. SD videos look very fine on Vimeo, for example, and HD won't make a film good if the content itself is bad.

October 21st, 2008, 03:05 PM	#7
Marc Burleigh Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Paris (France) Posts: 143	Well, I'm all for living in the real world. With its compromises. I can totally understand why the YouTube rule was set up. All the videos are in the same place, the website is tried and tested with the various browsers (IE, Mozilla, Firefox, Safari, Opera, etc), the compression means we're all on the same playing field where content is lording it over special adapters and expensive cameras, and having Google as its patron means it's going to be around for a long time with new features added to it so our videos are there for posterity. That said, though, the argument for Vimeo is winning me over. Which I have to say is probably a bad thing, because I live in a place with distinctly un-broadband technology. Uploading full video files will be drearily time-consuming and prone to connection upsets. But if I'm going to go the hours of effort to make a masterpiece of digital cinema (well, a sub-masterpiece given my paltry gear compared to the toys many of you guys have, but still a work of craft), I want it to reflect some of that in the theatre where it's going to be shown. The new DVinfo video hosting facility sounds mouthwateringly good. But until it's up and running, maybe we could consider Vimeo as the default site for this comp? You all know the technical superiority of Vimeo over YouTube. But there's also another reason I think we turn up to that site more than Google's baby: the company is better. Any which way you browse or search on Vimeo and you find videos that inspire, educate and illustrate. It's a cradle of creativity, and the comments from the people who watch are worthy of the productions being seen. Which is all very different from the mountain of pirated Japanese animé, softcore stripping, ripped TV shows and skateboard stunts set to predictable music that YouTube throws up. Vimeo is a class crowd. YouTube is a WalMart of derivation. (But of course, in the interests of group solidarity and just getting any sort of audience pay-off for the work that will be done, I'll abide by whatever decision is made.... ;-)

October 23rd, 2008, 12:15 PM	#11
Dick Mays Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 690	The reason I like youtube, it it allows me to quickly watch ALL of the shorts in the competition. Frankly, if I had an 80M bye download for every short, I'd probably not watch them all. The shorts i like, I watch again in high def if it is available.