-
Honestly NOT trying to trash broadcast TV… just reporting what I see on my newsfeeds these days…
-
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 -
[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.
-
[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 -
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 -
[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.
-
[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 -
[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.https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[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.
-
[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.
-
[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
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up