Video Hosting on DV Info?

[J. Stephen McDonald]

Do I remember that a couple of years ago, there was an indication that this feature would be added? I can imagine why it wouldn't be------it might be heavily used, instead of linking to websites that are primarily for hosting purposes. People more interested in showing all sorts of videos and viewing those from others might flood the forum. It could be hijacked into becoming more of a social-networking website, than one for discussions about the fine points of videomaking.

But anyway, it would be interesting to know if this might happen here and the reasons for and against it. I'm not entirely happy with any of the existing video-hosting websites and I can imagine that it would be done better here, for people wanting to show good video at its best.

[Chris Medico]

I think that has already been decided with the embed code implemented on the forum that let you see YouTube and Vimeo videos in the threads.

As the administrator on a different forum where videos are common I can tell you that it is not practical to host videos on a forum server. There is no real upside to doing that internally. The downside includes things such as constantly changing player code (browser compatibility problems), potential liability exposure for copyright infringement, and bandwidth demands on a scale that is so far beyond what the forum itself needs it boggles the mind.

I would be very surprised if Chris H. goes that route.

[Greg Boston]

Indeed, Chris makes many good points. But the primary problem is that last point. Bandwidth. It eats a lot of it when videos are streamed over and over.

As an example, I posted a link on another forum to a picture gallery on my Dropbox account. Within a day, I got a nasty gram from Dropbox that downloading had been suspended for 3 days due to the heavy volume. And those were just average sized JPG pictures.

The current system of using imbed code is the most feasible at this point in time.

Regards,

-gb-

[J. Stephen McDonald]

As I said in my first message, there were likely several reasons why video-hosting here wouldn't work so well. But a couple of years ago, Chris Hurd did say that he was considering it. I was hoping that he would tell us what the pros and cons were that he had discovered when he investigated the possibility.

I'm not very pleased with the video quality I've found on any hosting website, even those that require a subscription fee. I usually suggest that viewers download my full uploaded files (on those websites where this is offered), in order to play them at their full bit-rate on a good player. But I doubt that many people would do this, unless they were very interested in the subjects or in evaluating the camera's capabilities. Once in awhile Vimeo does a good enough job of re-encoding a video, that I really like what I'm seeing. Why there's so much variation in their results, I can't say.

With the introduction of things like 60p, 4K, 3-D and other advanced features, even more of a load is placed on the bandwidth for hosting services. Since online presentation is the primary way that most of us have that is available and affordable, are small screen windows, heavy compression and reduced quality going to be all that the future offers?

The situation is a lot better than it was 24 years ago, when I began shooting video. Then, my options were mostly providing 3rd or 4th-generation VHS tapes to a small number of people. A few viewers had S-VHS decks and Y/C inputs on their TV sets. Rarely, I could put something on a Beta SP tape. My best option for showing good quality was to take a camcorder to a location and plug it in to a monitor using S-Video. Beginning videomakers who have a direct link to the whole world as an audience, couldn't know how restricted things were, just a couple of decades ago.

[Chris Medico]

I'm sure he will pop in if we have left out anything significant.