Videotaping your RV and Getting The Clip Up On Web

[Pirkka]

Doug has done an nice article, but... here we go again.


First: This subforum might be renamed from 'photography' to 'photography and video'. Most videos has been put in the 'General...' -subforum and this subforum has been pretty unused. Comments?


Second: Why put videos to YouTube? Luckily there are alternatives -- you decide which one to like. Here are two examples of same video first one is in the YouTube and second in Stage6:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SOAyLGH1sFo
http://stage6.divx.com/user/STARR45/...ron-at-407kmph

Yes... the quality video takes more space and requires fast connection, but if you can afford the RV, this shouldn't be a problem. When I go to Youtube to watch the video I often quit just because I can't stand the quality (resolution and compression) those videos have...

[DeltaRomeo]

Good points!

I tend to use YouTube currently because, being owned by Google, it won't be going anywhere. And, being backed by Google, its features and video play size and infrastructure are only going to get more robust. That seems to be the case with everything they've touched (ex. Picasa, Google Earth, etc.).

I've played with Google's dedicated video stuff also and it's pretty darn impressive.

Any way a person goes I suspect we win - more RV videos online .

b,
d

[Ironflight]

Pirkka does have a point about us not using the "Video" forum....I know I've been guilty of it just becasue I forgot about it....we could probably move several of the threads from the past couple of weeks if you wanted to Doug!

[Pirkka]

Yeah, as Paul says, there is actually already own subforum for photo and video links so no need to rename this anyhow. But use it rather than general... so it also narrows the search when you are looking something.

[videobobk]

I have produced videos for about 15 years and wouldn't consider putting one on YouTube. While it is nice to have everyone view something, to me it would be like serving fine wine in a paper cup. I did a 3 1/2 minute video of my building process through the first flight and it turned out pretty well considering how little time I spent on it. I would like for you all to see it. I may take a look at getting it on something like Stage6 as that did seem to have better quality, although jerky. I know, nothing is perfect. Also I am going to have to learn how to convert down to the standards these websites use. My 3 1/2 minute video is over 200 MB. BTW, the background music is the old gospel "I'll Fly Away" specially recorded for the video. If someone would like to lend a hand at getting this on the web I could drop you a DVD. I admit to ignorance here.

Bob Kelly

[DeltaRomeo]

Originally Posted by videobobk

snip... My 3 1/2 minute video is over 200 MB. ...snip

Bob, you hit the nail on the head. That's why I'm using YouTube for now - sending 3,000 people to a 200MB video clip in one hour will bring a web server to its knees (don't ask me how I know ).

YouTube's infrastructure is such that it can handle it. I'd imagine, as is historically the case, that in a year to two we'll have a dozen more options that allow us to upload 5GB clips that stream with no problem.

Have a great weekend!

dr

[WildBill]

I can understand the use of youtube due to the server load issue.

But Im one of those 6% ...
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
... of people that browse with javascript disabled, and I also dont use Flash/Shockwave.

: It slows the browser down, and is somewhat of a security risk.

Do I need -more power-, maybe, but I wouldnt add extra hp to carry around un-necessary extra pounds in an airplane if I didnt have too either.

maybe they use flash/shockwave because it allows them to control content better, but I wish the free-tubes would use regular video files.

[WildBill]

Adobe Flash Exploit Could Log Keystrokes

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?si...56233&from=rss