So I’m an inconsistent and unreliable blogger, unlike my friend Jeff Jarvis and many other blog-tastic bloggers out there. But I’m trying to get better.
A few days ago NewTeevee blogged about this interesting study commissioned by Akamai. It found that one of the biggest headaches for viewers of video on the web are the inexorable waiting times for buffering and adequate playback of video.
Isn’t this something we learned by the end of the 90s? Does anyone really like watching awful Windows Media and Realplayer streaming video? Perhaps this is part of the reason Big Media is having so much trouble getting a leg up in the new video world.
That, or maybe we’re too focused on “Videoblogging” and not enough on production and distribution. The name is not the thing, the thing is the thing. Are all people who utilize RSS, WordPress, etc to distribute video on the web necessarily Videobloggers? Particularly if Videoblogging comes to mean a specific genre of content being produced and distributed on the web? For example, what, exactly, is the difference between a Magazine, a Newspaper, and a Periodical?
Produce interesting, innovative, and professional content on the web. That will change the world of web video and bring a larger audience probably more than making the video less painful to view!
In fact, despite the predominance of YouTube in the mainstream discourse concerning Video on the Net, the Pew Internet and American Life Project found that approximately 60% of adults watch video online, and 62% preferred videos with “professional quality.”
Now then, this is an important realization for independent video producers, and one that is necessary if we truly want to revolutionize the face of modern media and make a living producing content ourselves. Video cameras and other devices that record video are becoming nearly ubiquitous in Western society, particularly the urban United States.
However, recording quality is not. Despite the ease and affordability of things like the Pure Digital FlipVideo camera, or Sanyo’s Xacti series, or many others, without having quality audio, thinking about whether you have adequate light, and most importantly, how to be sure your video tells an interesting story, you’ll be up a creek. And in terms of the new Sanyo Xacti’s cost, we can outfit two of our correspondents with cameras, mics, and some tapes for the same.
Luckily, for similar prices or less you can purchase miniDV camcorders on Ebay with mic inputs and possibly even find a mic included in prices similar to these new mpeg4 cameras!
All I’m saying is that we shouldn’t sacrifice quality for accessibility or hip gadgetry, and it now seems that our audience agrees.
© 2013 Small World News
With all cameras, I’ve found you have to work these video storytelling tools’ strengths and avoid their weaknesses. “Quality” has less to do with make and model numbers and more to do with how the tool is used, and how the story is weaved. Great points in your post!