Maryam buying meat


Click to Play

Here’s another simple videoblog. Done with our Nikon S1 camera. Less than $300 according to Google. Anyway, this is in the Half Moon Bay grocery Maryam and I shop in, just wanted to show you the meat selection and demonstrate that you can do a video blog post with a very simple camera without much of anything to say.

Now, all you “anti-video” people, please write a post where you explain to someone who hasn’t been part of our society for, say, 20 years, all about the meat selection Maryam had to choose from this afternoon when she was buying her meat. It’d take you thousands of words to explain what this short little video clip can say (and, it still wouldn’t get close).

Note that she didn’t say anything. That this video post doesn’t make a point. It just is what her shopping experience looked like this afternoon. Does this matter to my audience? Not really. But why do you need an audience for everything you do?

72 thoughts on “Maryam buying meat

  1. If we are going to compare the merits of blogging, audiogging, and vlogging (it’s high time we stopped making references to audio based blogs and unpaid ad for Apple) I think a distinction has to be made between what is best for the producer of the content and the consumer of it.

    As you said it was “just as easy” for you to upload a video and it was 99% as effective as a couple of photos would have been.. In fact if your entire vlog post had been just the video,. you might say it was much easier for you to just do that.

    Were you to add text to your entry, the hardest part from a content creation perspective would have been to compose the text, review your grammar and spelling, and (unless the software does it for you) format the relationship between the text and the link to the video, add the still image that represents the video, etc.

    I think we can say with confidence that in the future, near future in fact, having a camera device with you and shooting interesting things as you see them and having those video recording made into a vlog will be as easy as pushing a button or a few on your cell phone (wouldn’t it be nicer to have a full function camera with this communications capability built in?!).

    From the consumers point of view though, careful selection of presentation medium will always be a plus. I’d really like a written summary of whatever I am about to hear or see, and in fact a full transcript would be the only professional way to do it . How many professionals are doing this? Remember the drumbeat to put alternate text descriptions of every image we put on web pages? Disabled people can’t see those images, but the software they use can access those text descriptions and make the content more meaningful to them. How about the deaf? Doesn’t a transcript of any video or audio content make perfect sense? Oh yes that might be too much trouble if you are putting something together that you know will only be viewed by sighted and hearing family and friends, but I maintain if you are doing this for a living, you have a responsibility, more accurately the organization you are working for has a responsibility, to make your content accessible to as many people as possible.

    I think in the next few years, the variety of presentation formats available will lead to a shakeout of just who is doing this stuff in a professional capacity and who is doing it for fun or as an aspiring professional. To use an old sexist expression: we are about to “separate the men from the boys” in the world of online media.

  2. If we are going to compare the merits of blogging, audiogging, and vlogging (it’s high time we stopped making references to audio based blogs and unpaid ad for Apple) I think a distinction has to be made between what is best for the producer of the content and the consumer of it.

    As you said it was “just as easy” for you to upload a video and it was 99% as effective as a couple of photos would have been.. In fact if your entire vlog post had been just the video,. you might say it was much easier for you to just do that.

    Were you to add text to your entry, the hardest part from a content creation perspective would have been to compose the text, review your grammar and spelling, and (unless the software does it for you) format the relationship between the text and the link to the video, add the still image that represents the video, etc.

    I think we can say with confidence that in the future, near future in fact, having a camera device with you and shooting interesting things as you see them and having those video recording made into a vlog will be as easy as pushing a button or a few on your cell phone (wouldn’t it be nicer to have a full function camera with this communications capability built in?!).

    From the consumers point of view though, careful selection of presentation medium will always be a plus. I’d really like a written summary of whatever I am about to hear or see, and in fact a full transcript would be the only professional way to do it . How many professionals are doing this? Remember the drumbeat to put alternate text descriptions of every image we put on web pages? Disabled people can’t see those images, but the software they use can access those text descriptions and make the content more meaningful to them. How about the deaf? Doesn’t a transcript of any video or audio content make perfect sense? Oh yes that might be too much trouble if you are putting something together that you know will only be viewed by sighted and hearing family and friends, but I maintain if you are doing this for a living, you have a responsibility, more accurately the organization you are working for has a responsibility, to make your content accessible to as many people as possible.

    I think in the next few years, the variety of presentation formats available will lead to a shakeout of just who is doing this stuff in a professional capacity and who is doing it for fun or as an aspiring professional. To use an old sexist expression: we are about to “separate the men from the boys” in the world of online media.

  3. Robert,

    Yawn.

    Podcasting has the huge advantage that I can listen while I’m doing something else – while I drive, while I work out, even while I code.

    Video, on the other hand, requires my full attention. I can’t do anything else. Which for me – and I assume most people – limits the amount of time they have to watch video.

    Which means that video needs to be more interesting and more compelling than audio. And it has to be good enough so that you can stand to watch it, *preferably* on a reasonably-sized screen. That generally takes a decent camera, a bit of care, and a bit of editing. And more than a bit of skill.

    I’m in a group that revolves around amateur video, and I’ve looked at lots of user content. It’s really painful to watch. Horrible lighting. Jerky camera work. Poor audio. As I’m sure you all know from your Channel 9 experience.

    Now, Channel 9 worked *despite* the production values because the content was such high-value (delta my segment…). But I think that sort of content is a rarity. Sure, it’s out there, but it’s not widespread.

    Say I wrote a blog post that said, “today, while shopping, I was marvelling at the size of the meat counter at our Top Foods. It’s 40 feet (12 meters) long, and has a huge variety of meat in it – including beef, pork, lamb, chicken, and even some buffalo.”

    You would probably consider that a pretty boring post, and you’d be right. So how is the video any different? All I see is “lots of meat”. Looks like some is beef. Some is ground. Wow.

    I was in Europe a few years ago. In markets it’s considered bad form to touch the produce with your bare hands, and the markets provide plastic gloves to use. That’s an interesting different between US and European shopping, but it’s only worth a sentence at best.

    Content is king, and in my mind, there are lots more people with interesting things to say that people with interesting things to show.

  4. Robert,

    Yawn.

    Podcasting has the huge advantage that I can listen while I’m doing something else – while I drive, while I work out, even while I code.

    Video, on the other hand, requires my full attention. I can’t do anything else. Which for me – and I assume most people – limits the amount of time they have to watch video.

    Which means that video needs to be more interesting and more compelling than audio. And it has to be good enough so that you can stand to watch it, *preferably* on a reasonably-sized screen. That generally takes a decent camera, a bit of care, and a bit of editing. And more than a bit of skill.

    I’m in a group that revolves around amateur video, and I’ve looked at lots of user content. It’s really painful to watch. Horrible lighting. Jerky camera work. Poor audio. As I’m sure you all know from your Channel 9 experience.

    Now, Channel 9 worked *despite* the production values because the content was such high-value (delta my segment…). But I think that sort of content is a rarity. Sure, it’s out there, but it’s not widespread.

    Say I wrote a blog post that said, “today, while shopping, I was marvelling at the size of the meat counter at our Top Foods. It’s 40 feet (12 meters) long, and has a huge variety of meat in it – including beef, pork, lamb, chicken, and even some buffalo.”

    You would probably consider that a pretty boring post, and you’d be right. So how is the video any different? All I see is “lots of meat”. Looks like some is beef. Some is ground. Wow.

    I was in Europe a few years ago. In markets it’s considered bad form to touch the produce with your bare hands, and the markets provide plastic gloves to use. That’s an interesting different between US and European shopping, but it’s only worth a sentence at best.

    Content is king, and in my mind, there are lots more people with interesting things to say that people with interesting things to show.

  5. There is one problem. even this short clips that u posted in 4 MB. A lot of us pay net charges depending on upload and download of data, so while video blogging may be “easy” its not so cheap for viewers. One might argue that this is stretching it a bit, but if more and more bloggers start posting video, it would be difficult for viewers like me to keep their already bloated bills, in check.

  6. There is one problem. even this short clips that u posted in 4 MB. A lot of us pay net charges depending on upload and download of data, so while video blogging may be “easy” its not so cheap for viewers. One might argue that this is stretching it a bit, but if more and more bloggers start posting video, it would be difficult for viewers like me to keep their already bloated bills, in check.

  7. Hi Robert,
    Here’s a video blog post of me taking Carol for a balloon ride over Boston:

    http://stevegarfield.blogs.com/videoblog/2006/09/carol_and_steve_1.html

    A couple of notes:

    1. I shot this with a Nokis N93 cellphone that I’ve got on trial right now. The video on this is amazing.

    2. I basically took all the footage and lined it up and then put in an opening, close and some music. Just the footage is enough to convey the feeling of going up in a balloon ride for the first time, but I like to package my moment showing footage.

    3. I got a free ride since last year when I went the ride was closed and I put up some video of that.

    4. Nothing was scripted and the owner wanted to talk about business opportunities for people. I could have cut that out, but I left it in. It’s waht happened and he’s a nice guy. It also gives people an idea of ways to incorporate advertising without having to actually create ads. It’s user generated advertising. The future is huge for this type of thing as long as it’s transparent. If it’s not, I’d be questioning what is real. I dosclose everything on the blog post.

    Enjoy.

  8. Hi Robert,
    Here’s a video blog post of me taking Carol for a balloon ride over Boston:

    http://stevegarfield.blogs.com/videoblog/2006/09/carol_and_steve_1.html

    A couple of notes:

    1. I shot this with a Nokis N93 cellphone that I’ve got on trial right now. The video on this is amazing.

    2. I basically took all the footage and lined it up and then put in an opening, close and some music. Just the footage is enough to convey the feeling of going up in a balloon ride for the first time, but I like to package my moment showing footage.

    3. I got a free ride since last year when I went the ride was closed and I put up some video of that.

    4. Nothing was scripted and the owner wanted to talk about business opportunities for people. I could have cut that out, but I left it in. It’s waht happened and he’s a nice guy. It also gives people an idea of ways to incorporate advertising without having to actually create ads. It’s user generated advertising. The future is huge for this type of thing as long as it’s transparent. If it’s not, I’d be questioning what is real. I dosclose everything on the blog post.

    Enjoy.

  9. As a technical exercise, this is fine. I assume you’re load test your servers/feed. But when you come to the real thing, content is king (or god help Podtech). But then, you knew that already big guy, and all publicity is good publicity, right?

    BTW, no healthy breakfast option for you big guy? :-)

  10. As a technical exercise, this is fine. I assume you’re load test your servers/feed. But when you come to the real thing, content is king (or god help Podtech). But then, you knew that already big guy, and all publicity is good publicity, right?

    BTW, no healthy breakfast option for you big guy? :-)

  11. Robert – and to the guy who said WP only allows 25Mb uploads – why not just send the file to Youtube then embed the player in your blog post? It’s a dead simple step, makes the download much quicker, and saves people from worrying about having the right player and codec.

  12. Robert – and to the guy who said WP only allows 25Mb uploads – why not just send the file to Youtube then embed the player in your blog post? It’s a dead simple step, makes the download much quicker, and saves people from worrying about having the right player and codec.

  13. Albert: because my Nikon spits out .MOV’s.

    And I disagree that it’s not very good. I use it all over the place. It does exactly what it’s supposed to do. But, it is funny that it works better on Firefox than it does on IE.

  14. Albert: because my Nikon spits out .MOV’s.

    And I disagree that it’s not very good. I use it all over the place. It does exactly what it’s supposed to do. But, it is funny that it works better on Firefox than it does on IE.

  15. Hi Robert,

    I got your point. But I just hate having to install another player on my PC, especially when it is not very good. Why don’t you use wmv?

  16. Hi Robert,

    I got your point. But I just hate having to install another player on my PC, especially when it is not very good. Why don’t you use wmv?

Comments are closed.