Tutespark Week 4.
1. Where and when did usable online video start? (Provide some refs. and an example if possible)
Did a quick google search. Online video history information.
The following youtube clip resulted. A bit of a Youtube sales pitch with the When of online video indicated as late 1990,s with the introduction of the internet which provided greater bandwidth availability. Providing the function of uploading video and other media onto websites but not the ability to share video until the introduction of YouTube in Feb 05.
Ref: http://www.5min.com/Video/History-of-Online-Video-and-YouTube-95793661
Don’t like this as an answer but could not find anything better and have spent to much time on it already!
Search variations included; introduction, initiation, history, origins, evolution, online downloaded, uploaded, video, media, film, etc. Options other than google; AOL, Alta Vista, Bing, Youtube, Wiki, and others.
2. In the lecture we heard about technological innovations that were used by the studios to lure audiences. (Mostly to combat the popularity of TV)
What recent innovations are being used to lure us in the movies?
Google search of “What cinema innovations lure us to movies”
The following site identifies the 3D Cinema innovation for investors and patrons. The experience and 3D the experience of the future. Blah Blah Blah.
Ref: http://www.cgeye.net/?p=36
This URL http://vietnamnews.vnagency.com.vn/Opinion/Your-Say/202051/Viewer-choice-may-render-cinema-quota-law-pointless.html from the same search identified “with improvements in both screen and sound quality, led to a revival.” This revival of cinema patronage is threatened by the introduction of on demand viewing and home entertainment technologies.
Further searches to identify actual research of cinema lures; google search of cinema lures research.
Identified price and income as factors this reference, http://ideas.repec.org/a/pio/envira/v37y2005i3p483-501.html looked at location and distance as a factor for consumers.
What are they luring us from?
Using the same references above, the main theme is an attempt to lure consumers away from online legal or illegal acquisition of film or predominantly the loss of pofit from the easy online access to the same material.
Additionally, in combination with sociology and other schools of thought the idea of “getting out of the house” is argued. ( http://www.whitehutchinson.com/leisure/articles/87.shtml ) - this is not a lure as such it is just further information.
3. Are short films still being made? Why? Who pays for them to be made?
In short yes. Short films are more common today as the function of making the film and distributing the content is more accessible.
Home/amateur films and independent low budget film are payed for by the individuals or some sponsor and mainstream short films are contracted by larger agencies, companies and production companies. Some examples.
Short film pixar ‘ For the Birds’
Short film amateur comedy - interesting also reflection on the previous lectures on methods of shot. Note this is crap.
The dates
This one is a student short film – Not so Fast.
4. The term viral is thrown about ad-hoc but what does it mean in film/movie arena? Give some examples.
The definition of viral video through
http://www.yourdictionary.com/computer/viral-video
viral video - A video that spreads quickly via the Internet. It is often a short clip on a video sharing site such as YouTube that people reference in blogs, e-mails and instant messages. See viral marketing.
An example of the many I received via email several times.
5. Online video distribution isn't limited to the short film format. We are now starting to see television styled shows made solely for internet release (webisodes). Find an example of this style of content and discuss how viewing television content in this way can positively and negatively affect the viewer's experience.
An example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3Th9JJLCQA
Dean Koontz's "Odd Passenger" Webisode 1
Ok there are several ways this can impact the viewers experience but I will touch on only a few.
This can be positive as come webisodes content may never be available on mainstream TV, therefore not enjoyed. A negative could include a viewers expectations as they may think that a particular quality will be achieved but through this medium budget restraints are not a consideration and any material can be observed via the net.
Next is choice, if the viewer does not like what they see they can easily access an alternate webisode option. On that note there is no real awareness of how long the episodes will be continued unlike mainstream TV mostly a series will last at least a season, dependant on market research it may continue.
No comments:
Post a Comment