[Mike Smith]

Thanks for the update on that. Fernando. I’d missed that OSX v 10.6 (and, I guess, upwards) have gone over to 2.2 gamma as a default. There’s Apple stuff on this at https://support.apple.com/kb/HT3712

[Mike Smith]

It’s OK to do what works, for the story and its audience, and the best you can with the material you have at your disposal. But you may want to make anything non-classical look like a feature, a positive choice you’ve made, rather than like a bug, just something you got wrong.

Many docs are made single camera. It’s up to the crew to provide coverage to allow for editing.

[Mike Smith]

Hi Fernando

The Safari only issue is likely to be colour management; no other browser supports it as a default, at least to date (and maybe not in the near future.)

If Jim is using a Quicktime app to encode his H264 files then very likely they come with a colour profile attached. If that colour profile is not sRGB, then a profile-aware browser (Safari) will render the videos with perhaps different colours or look from those rendered by other browsers. The links above give a little more background to this.

Of course this may not be Jim’s issue.

[Mike Smith]

Safari has colour management (which is optional in Firefox, though I believe rarely used). So image display in Safari will be affected by any colour profiles attached to the images. Does your video come with a colour profile? Do these articles help … ?
https://www.gballard.net/psd/go_live_page_profile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html
https://css-tricks.com/color-rendering-difference-firefox-vs-safari/
https://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1067675
https://forums.macrumors.com/archive/index.php/t-480481.html

[Mike Smith]

Browsers do render differently. If your code complies with web standards, most modern browsers will try to render it in compliance with the w3c (worldwide web consortium) recommendations. But if your code does not comply with html standards, many browsers switch to their own “quirks” modes – and attempt to present your non-compliant code as they think you may have meant it. Those quirks modes can vary quite a lot.

So it will help you to get your code to comply. At present your new page has a lot of html errors, and one css error. You can check these for yourself at at https://validator.w3.org/ for html and https://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator for css.

Once you pages are standards compliant, you can work on any remaining issues. IE6 is old, now relatively little used, and quite hard to support; my recollection is that it has a different interpretation of the box model, handling margins and borders in a non standards way, but I haven’t checked that today and my memory could be off. Safari is a worry – it’s reported to do a good job of meeting w3c standards, so you would hope to have it render your site as you want it.

[Mike Smith]

Hi David

My answer was meant to be helpful. The copyright link at the gov site has the answers to his legal question. But from a programme making perspective, cutting in logos when companies are referred to must be close to bottom. Thinking about finding, shooting, asking for, demanding appropriate b roll, or even generating something interesting in AE or Motion and playing with the interview shots, might add more than showing us the Eiffel tower whenever we mention Paris … unless it’s a comedy of course.

All best.

[Mike Smith]

What would a bare logo add to your program …?
https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/

[Mike Smith]

Either way works, and there are fervent advocates of both approaches. It may depend a little on what suits your project.

Pure economy would dictate a tight final script ahead of shooting, which could even be prerecorded, and then film sequences and any graphics or other material would be created to fit that timeline. Few take the approach quite that far: the drawback that counters the costs savings is that many feel you get less good work this way.

Over here in the UK John Birt, ex ITV current affairs (very different from docs over here) and with a “mission to explain” was strong associated with this script-tightly-first approach.

By many accounts this led him into significant conflicts when he became head of the BBC, where the tradition is much more “reporters with cameras”. In this (BBC traditional) approach, the investigator starts researching a story and collecting material almost in parallel, the story is shaped in shooting and editing in response to what is discovered or uncovered, and then any final voiceover is written with the final edit very much in mind.

When Mr Birt left the BBC, attempts to impose his full-script-first working style were reported to be largely abandoned – most of the corporation’s filmmakers were not in favour.

There will be cases, though, when the script-first approach works – the poem section of the famous old doc The Night Mail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_Mail would be a good example.

For my part, though I think planning, preparation and story research prior to shooting are essential, it also seems to me that the director and editor have to be flexible to respond to and cover what they find in the production process, and have to adapt both shoot and edit to the story as they discover it. So final voiceover would have to be written at the end – otherwise, you are trying to jam your “experts” and your images into what your preconceptions told you, rather than learning from your various expert sources and developing follow-up questions in response to their input.

[Mike Smith]

Did you look at this one ..? https://learn.awakenedvoice.com/2007/06/06/embedding-video-in-wordpress/

With this and standard qt embed code you should be good to go.

Also there’s https://remarkablogger.com/2008/07/10/how-to-add-video-to-a-wordpress-blog-post-the-easy-way/

[Mike Smith]

You’ll want a link or import statement, like one or other of these two, in the head of your html document.

< link rel=”stylesheet” type=”text/css” href=”yourstyle.css” />

Or, alternatively,
<style type=”text/css”>
@import url(yourstyle.css);
</style>

Of course you also need to have the css file uploaded and in the folder where the link refers to it. To preview locally in Safari from the file on your hard disc, you’ll want to save a copy the css file into the same local folder / relative path where you saved the local copy of the html.

If you can’t make this work, maybe post a link to where your page is.