15 posts tagged “video”

With all the Apple announcements this week coming from the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference, there are bound to be a lot of expectations swirling around the new iPhone 3G S.  The most anticipated feature of the new generation of the iPhone is the support of video sending options and the ability for developers to access the iPhone video capabilities for various applications.

One such application that is taking advantage of the added video support is TwitterFon, which will be integrating with the video-specific Twitter app TwitVid for enabling TwitterFon users to capture videos with their iPhones and subsequently post them via their Twitter stream [via Venturebeat].
<!--more-->
It's an important step for Twitter apps, as much of Twitter's activity is attributed to mobile users such as those that own iPhones.  Having a more direct way to marry Twitter with iPhone videos means a slew of related applications are expected to arise in the coming year, as well as many iPhone-specific video update applications that operate outside of Twitter all together.

The iPhone device as well as its platform has long been setting standards for the mobile marketplace, spurring development across the board for different manufactures and mobile providers alike.  But will the added support also spur Twitter itself to finally delve deeper into media sharing?

Granted, Twitter has done a pretty good job of sticking to its core competency, and that solely revolves around microblogging within the realm of easy mobile access and integration.  But should Twitter go ahead and support various media formats, such as images and videos?  Other microblogging platforms such as Pownce and Tumblr support all media formats, and the added support hasn't necessarily given these other services a leg up in the race for dominating the microblogging space.  And Flickr stuck to its core competency of photo-sharing for years, only recently adding video support, and the upgrade hasn't made a huge dent in Flickr's overall service or standing as far as video-sharing goes.

For Twitter, however, adding more media support wouldn't hurt the web service, though Twitter may wait until more mobile support is available for incorporating multimedia support via its microblogging platform.  In the meantime Twitter remains to rely on third party applications for added value in certain aspects of its microblogging potential.

Note: originally posted on MultisocialMedia.com

So MySpace won't let you post your Photobucket videos and remixes anymore.  That's no fun.  While Photobucket has formally acknowledged that some of their services have been blocked from use on MySpace, the social networking giant has not said anything regarding the matter quite yet. 

We're all sitting on the edge of our seats awaiting a reason for blocking Photobucket videos and remixes.  Why not block everything, photos and all? Does MySpace admit that blocking photos as well would really piss off their users? Or do they just not care?  Photobucket seems to know that MySpace could become a pretty dull place without their slideshows, and since the rise of this whole online video thing, MySpace has been pretty sensitive about who gets to show clips.

Arrington aroused speculation that MySpace, notorious for cutting off widget makers, is taking a preemptive strike against Photobucket in the event that they be bought by a rival. Wouldn't that be a replay of the GooTube drama?  Or maybe MySpace has some new video remixing widget player they'll be releasing tomorrow, via SpringWidgets?

No? Well, whatever the case may be, I'm sure we'll hear from MySpace sooner or later, and they'll say that there was some technical/secuirity/whatever issue with Photobucket's video and remix widget player.  I refuse to believe that MySpace doesn't have some line of communication with a good portion of widget makers out there.  Especially the big ones, like Photobucket.  Jay's got some pretty interesting thoughts regarding the MySpace widget existence, so be sure to look out for that soon. 

And yes, MySpace is abandoning their roots, and their users are upset.  But the users keep on coming! MySpace has yet to fall from grace when it comes to the public at large. And when you're that big, you tend to do whatever you want until you actually can't get away with it anymore.  Taking away so many key privileges for users, though, is heading in the wrong direction.

So you have your photos and videos online, and you have easy access to everyone else's photos and videos online.  In case you were getting bored with that, here are some online editing services that offer you some ideas for what to do with your photos and your videos (and your time).

Comeeko:

Hailing from Australia, Comeeko and more widely-known sister company PikiPimp let you turn your photos into a comic strip, or add all sorts of "bling" to your pictures.  PikiPimp recently launched Piki(fx) where you can add gif animation to your images as well.  The perfect match for MySpace teens that crave attention and love leaving flashy comments on other people's pages. They provide the code to do just this. You can download, email, and embed Comeeko comics as well. The company is currently seeking VC funding to further the development of their services offered. 

Cuts:

Take some YouTube clips and add your own captions.  Then take out the boring parts, loop the funny scenes, and add a few sound effects.  This brand new company has been in the works for over a year, and is the brainchild of some extremely smart and powerful industry veterans, including Lucinda Holt, Sunny Balijepalli, and Russell Holt.  Cuts' simple interface is easy to use and navigate.  No need to install anything onto your computer. Bookmark or Digg your favorite cuts, and embed or email some more.  Don't have time to make your own cut?  Watch everyone else's.  They're pretty funny.

Google's new frontpage gadget lets you watch MTV content.  This gadget, one of thousands provided for your frontpage, brings in all kinds of tv programming that's been provided by networks' broadband channels. 

So if you'd like to consider this a loophole for Viacom's persistently upset stance on Google playing their content, go right ahead.  But I can't imagine that this is much different than finding search results for Viacom--or even video search results for that matter.  The content isn't pirated (it shouldn't be, at lease).  As a matter of fact, the way in which you can watch MTV using Google's gadget feed  is probably what Viacom would prefer over the pirated content that has made YouTube what it is today. Legality.  That's all that Viacom wants, right? And maybe some revenue kickback. 

At any rate, many are speculating that this new Google gadget will increase the strain on the relationship between Google and Viacom.  And maybe it will. It's still easy to find those pirated YouTube clips with a quick search on Google Video, but I guess all that really will have to be worked out in the courtroom. Could Viacom get all that upset about the RSS feed on Google?  Would they, in turn, get mad at all the other companies that are allowing users to make their own program line-ups based on content provided through these feeds?

Last.fm took the opportunity while at SXSW to mention that they will be incorporating video search into their services.  Modeled after their vast music  social recommendation technology, they feel that video is the natural next step.  Online video is, after all, the new music.  Last.fm will create their video search service based on their Audioscrobbler software, which is currently used for music.  They have already signed deals with EMI and Warner, which will allow Last.fm to stream their music videos. 

...
And while there are several businesses including video search in some fashion, as well as the growing number of start-ups that are tackling video search with a fresh take, it is the type of recommendation system that Last.fm may propose that will really give the best access to the long tail of music videos.  Amazon and Netflix both built strong businesses on social recommendation systems.  And considering the difficulty in finding the true nature of a video and relying heavily on keywords that content owners have attached to their content, leveraging a social recommendation system is a nice way to get around such an obstacle.

via

No one's been ragging on Mark Cuban lately, and that's because his prophecy about GooTube being slapped with lawsuits turned out to be right.  Viacom, YouTube's worst enemy, is taking the video-sharing site to court to the tune of $1 billion.  That's more than half of what the company was purchased for when Google decided to take on the responsibility of the adolecent video hub. 

The tension between Viacom and YouTube has become rather thick lately, escalating on a weekly basis.  The promises YouTube made to the media industry have yet to pan out, and other video sharing sites are taking note, striving for extra measures to ensure that they do not fall in the same trap as YouTube.  Other media companies have perked their ears as well, as the larger networks have taken a tendency to align with Viacom, noting that YouTube's copyright infringement issues have yet to be settled. 

While YouTube claims that they have yet to receive the lawsuit from Viacom, the ensuing war is getting bloodier by the day.  As long as YouTube remains non-compliant, they will continue to be threatened by established media.  This can't be good for Google, which is trying to permeate the old media realm in what seems to be another advertising takeover.  They've recently added printed and radio ads to their list of services, and are no doubt anxious to take their simplistic and self-serving model to new heights. 

Though YouTube tried to avoid this very consequence by making preemptive deals with several media companies, the walls are now tumbling down around YouTube.  Will this end in defeat for YouTube, placing them in the same situation as Napster?  Or will this simply be enough to get YouTube's attention and compliance?

Viacom and YouTube are still battling it out, and a recent statement from Viacom has brought new light (and perspective) to the dissonance between the two companies. Viacom, which demanded that the popular video-sharing site remove over 100,000 clips that infringed on copyright agreements, states that they've seen a substantial increase in traffic to their own websites as a direct result.

Instead of waiting for the deal with YouTube to pan out, Viacom has taken a proactive measure to ensure that they're not on the losing side of an ongoing situation. They've utilized their far-reaching network, including television stations such as MTV, to drive traffic to their own websites in an effort to monetize the traffic that was previously lost to YouTube.

If Viacom's statements are true (considering YouTube says the exact opposite, citing a surge in traffic since the Viacom clips were removed), then more power to them. Networks are more emphatically seeking out ways to avoid the middleman and bring traffic directly to their own sites. Why shell out cash to YouTube for things like branded channels, and why wait for second-hand ad revenue when you can show (better quality) video clips directly from your own site? Viacom obviously considers this to be asinine , and is getting a few of the other large networks to agree.

But if YouTube continues to be the centralizing hub that it's become, it will be an unavoidable fact that advertisers will always follow the crowd. And the crowd is still on YouTube.

via

    Hearst has been revamping their web image for some months now, adding niche social networks and user-generated content submissions to their magazines' online counterparts.  They've now hooked up with Maven to create 12 user-generated video sites that will really amp up their web campaign.  The highly customizable Maven players will work well with branding, and will fit with any of Hearst's magazine titles.  Their own content as well as ad campaigns can be inserted with user-generated content.

The most important aspect of this strategic move is Hearst's circumvention of middle-men, taking their social network and advertising capabilities directly to the users.  By creating a web space that invites users to submit their own content, they've carved out a market of content with which to latch onto for marketing purposes, directly to their existing customer base. 

Instead of going through Google or Yahoo, or other advertising companies that will will place ad content with videos on other hosting sites like YouTube or MySpace, they've created their own market in a distinct effort to eliminate the middle-man.  Of course this will only work if their niche social networks gain enough steam for this to be properly effective.

  YuMe, an advertising company that deals with the online video market, has officially launched today.  The company, which received $7 million in venture funding from Khosla Ventures, Accel Partners and BV Capital, has been working with advertisers in beta for some time.

The service offered by YuMe is particularly important for advertisers that have an obvious concern for their ad campaigns being associated with questionable material by offering "brand safe" content.  Their technique of scanning video content and categorizing it accordingly means that YuMe can assure advertisers that their campaign will show within the context it was meant for.

  YuMe, an advertising company that deals with the online video market, has officially launched today.  The company, which received $7 million in venture funding from Khosla Ventures, Accel Partners and BV Capital, has been working with advertisers in beta for some time.

The service offered by YuMe is particularly important for advertisers that have an obvious concern for their ad campaigns being associated with questionable material by offering "brand safe" content.  Their technique of scanning video content and categorizing it accordingly means that YuMe can assure advertisers that their campaign will show within the context it was meant for.

This tool is good for video hosting sites that wish to offer an ad-revenue sharing model.  As this system is geared for advertisers to pick where they want their content to show, it leaves little flexibility for the content owners.  This doesn't appear to be a system that would enable content owners to pick which ads show alongside their material.  YuMe is directed towards lowering advertisers' risk.

YuMe's real time tracking system allows for easy modification of ad campaigns and provides added value for the advertisers, who can see peak times and overall effectiveness of their online ads.

I'm curious to know how they go about searching and categorizing web video content, as it is probably the most difficult thing to search, given its visual (as opposed to textual) context.  Does YuMe simply search keywords associated with the video content? If that were the case, it would be rather easy to trick the system.