Archive for the 'Video Technology' Category

Video in email just got easy.

The “show me, don’t tell me” world of video is moving to email.

While many companies are already offering video email ‘platforms’ and Apple is promising video in email support for the new iPad, Google is the first company to make it simple (elegant will come some time in the future) and free. If you are a gmail user, when you place a YouTube link (the url, not the embed code) in your email,  gmail plays the video directly in the email (under the message). It’s not perfect and it only applies to gmail/YouTube users at this point but it’s a start and like Google’s constant upgrading of YouTube, you know this service will just get better over time.

Some of the reasons marketers and businesses should find this exciting:

1. It’s really easy to do (if you use gmail and YouTube).
2. You don’t have to worry about file compatibility, spam filters and technical issues around displaying video in your email.
3. Viewing rates will increase as more people are inclined to click on a video if they don’t have to go to a new page to view it.
4. New built-in interactivity in YouTube will allow you to do even more with videos contained in an email.
5. Email is still the principle web-based business communication tool. This is just another way to get your message out rather than relying on people coming to your website.

And the main reason some businesses won’t like this new capability – even more crap in your inbox.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

The iPad will do very well.

“It’s just an overgrown iPod Touch.”  That’s true, and that’s also a good thing.

There has been considerable debate over the most anticipated product release since… the iPhone. Critics dismiss the new iPad as nothing more than a big iPod Touch lacking new features and not even having the same functionality of a netbook. While much of the current criticism (multitasking, keyboard, etc) is valid I think it misses the point. The iPad is not a computer – it’s a portable media device. It is not meant to replace your computer – you’ll still use that device (laptop or desktop) to create content, do your taxes, write your novel, edit your movie, etc. It’s a portable device that allows you to conveniently consume content (movies, web, magazines, books, news live events, games, etc.) wherever you happen to be. And yes, some of these behaviors will be new.

First, some personal historical context:

- I remember witnessing the reaction of a colleague the first time he saw a Blackberry keypad. He burst out laughing declaring “who is ever going to use that ridiculous little keyboard?”.

- I remember having the argument years ago with a colleague trying to convince me that a cell phone and an electronic pocket organizer are two totally different devices and no one will ever want them combined into the same device.

- I remember (yep, I’m that old) having discussions with friends about the use of the Sony Walkman hearing  ‘who is every going to want to walk around everywhere with headphones on?”

New behaviors are not always obvious – which is the cause of one of the main criticisms of the new device:  “Who is going to want to carry around videos, and books and magazines and games on a tablet?” Everyone, is my guess.

It’s difficult for many to imagine watching TV on anything but your 125″ plasma or reading a paperback on anything but… paper, that’s how you’ve always done it. Why would that change? There are lots of reasons why this product should succeed:

1. It’ll get you off your couch. If I had a device that I could use to conveniently watch video/tv, play a game, get the news etc. outside, in the basement, on a bus wherever I happened to be, I would use it.  Yes, I can sort of do that with my laptop but it’s never simple. The app store is really, really simple. So is iTunes. Simple matters.

2. Human multi-tasking is a growing. Watch a 13 year old on the computer, talking on a mobile phone and watching TV, all at the same time. Mutli-tasking is what they do and this device will accelerate this activity. (I’ll leave it to armchair sociologists to determine if this will lead to the downfall of civilization.) I acknowledge that human multi-tasking will in some cases rely on computer based multitasking capabilities. Apple will sort this out in short order.

3. New gaming opportunities. The iPad will open up a huge opportunity for gamers to develop gesture-based games that take advantage of the touch screen interface. Combine that with a (future) video camera, accelerometer and geolocation and the possibilities are endless. (imagine Foursquare with a realtime 10 inch screen video and efficient gesture support…)

4. New marketing opportunities. Advertisers should love this device. It will be the next best thing to TV screens. Magazines, video, games…. even ads in books will be easily and effectively delivered in multiple ad formats.

5. Content Owners. Open source everything is great until you realize that everything in an open source environment tends toward free… then it’s a problem. Apples walled garden will appeal to many content owners who are looking for new audiences in a structured pay for play environment. In spite of the happy talk, all businesses exist to make a profit and the only way for content creators to make a living is for them to get paid.

6. Social media potential. This device will have video cameras next iteration and when it does that will launch a new wave in social media behaviors, tools and business models… assuming the telco’s pipes are up to the task.

7. It’s Apple. (Yep, I own an iPhone, but I also work on a PC).  Apple will deliver in the iPad three things it does really, really well: 1. A world class user interface, 2. A really smart ecosystem to support the device and 3. Cool.

Apple still has some things to work out – a video camera is one and not supporting Flash is another.  They can’t keep the walled garden up forever and I’m not sure how/if they will ever learn to play nice with Adobe – which is ironic since Adobe is the company that kept them alive in the early ’90’s (and then Microsoft) as the vast majority of Mac users used Apple computers to run their Adobe software. (I suppose business owners have short memories for a reason.)

This device will do very well.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

This is not the new Apple iTablet…. but it could be.

This video is well worth watching for a number of reasons: It’s beautifully shot, it’s fascinating and it illustrates the potential of a well designed tablet.

Sweden’s Bonnier and London-based studio BERG have launched a video prototype of a digital magazine touch tablet call the Mag+. I have no idea what Apples  iTablet is going to look like but I imagine it won’t be that different from what appears in this video.

In the short term many companies will jump into this market but I would guess the shakeout will be quick and dramatic. A few devices will resolve around magazine / reading application, like this device, and a few of others will win the video and rich media / entertainment application space.

Best guesses – Apple will have the coolest rich media device, Sony and Samsung will compete, Google will back / promote the open source gTablet and Conde Nast and Amazon will probably own the magazine and reader tablet spaces.

Any takers?

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

Absolutely stunning video production shot on digital camera

The worlds of still photography and video are beautifully colliding.

Up until recently still photography and videography have occupied very different spaces. Simply put, there are a lot more moving parts in video, sound being one of them and time (shooting a sequence of images over time) being another. Advancements in DSL camera technology are beginning to bridge this gap.

Tom Lowe from Timescapes.org filmed these incredible sequences in California’s White Mountains and in Yosemite National Park all on the Canon 5D2. (The Canon 5d2 is a digital SLR camera than can also capture HD video footage.) He used a special automated dolly rig that he built to capture the time lapse shots with tracking motion.

Another great example of this convergence is a video (not time lapse or a sequence of stills) commissioned by Canon and shot entirely on a Canon 5D2 called Reverie.  This was shot almost a year ago when the camera was being introduced to show the camera’s capabilities beyond still images. Interestingly the video received either praise or derision depending on what image capture camp you hailed from. The photog’s loved it claiming it clearly showed the evolution of the trade and the videographers hated it claiming the story was thin and pointless – which really missed the point. The shots were amazing considering they came from a $2500 still camera. (In fairness the shooter probably used another $10,000 worth of lenses, not to mention a helicopter and a whack of other pricey equipment and services.)  Whatever. The point of the video was to show what you can do with the new DSLR camera camera and anyone with an open mind had to be impressed.

Ultimately, having great equipment helps, no question, but both of these examples also show that equipment is only part of the equation.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

Web Video Production will have a profound effect on how businesses evolve

Computer Monitor

We tend to take most things in life on face value. The earth is round, the universe is expanding, the internet is slow, but improving. This slow progression and acceptance of our ‘realities’ also tends to stop us from seeing what’s just around the corner. An example:

Imagine if television in the 1950’s evolved the same way that the internet has.  What if TV in its infancy was little more than radio with text – much like the early stages of the web.  What if television started with many, many channels but they all offered slow text, perhaps a few graphics. Over time, maybe ten years or more the television broadcast networks evolved to allow some blinking graphics, then motion graphics via flash files that allowed you to see moving images accompanied with text. How powerful a medium would TV have been up to that point. Would it have consumed our lives the way it has? Would it become the focal point of our entertainment, our advertising, our news consumption?

With the Internet today we are close (but not quite there) to where television started over fifty years ago.  Video is widely viewable today online around the world but the experience varies considerably. That will change over the next few years as good or great quality video will be delivered to any screen you want it on (tv, computer, mobile devise). When that happens this will have a profound effect on how business communicate and evolve. Like the frog in the slowly warming pot of water, many businesses won’t even notice the change.

What makes the impact that much more significant is that all of the televisions are connected, everyone is creating their own television shows and you can watch what you want, wherever and whenever you want. Context is everything and the companies that win in this game will be the companies that can produce contextually relevant video products for their audiences. Content that has real value (not commercials), content that people want to share and content that changes how people see and do things.

No, text isn’t going away (in spite of the recent pain in the print industry) in our lifetime but we are entering a time where new visual languages, graphic interfaces and video content will change how businesses communicate.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

Video Sharing tops McKinsey survey as most useful Web 2.0 business tactic.

Early in 2009 McKinsey surveyed 1,700 executives from around the world to determine the value they have realized from their Web 2.0 deployments. The study stated that “the heaviest users of Web 2.0 applications are also enjoying benefits such as increased knowledge sharing and more effective marketing. These benefits often have a measurable effect on the business.”

Looking at the chart below it is not surprising that there is a strong correlation between the familiarity and relative longevity of certain technologies (video, blogs and rss) and their benefit to corporations. Companies, especially larger companies, tend to avoid adopting new ideas until they have seen other companies take that risk. It’s interesting to see Social Networking ranking so high – given it’s short lifespan. I would expect to see Social Networking topping the list in the next two years.

It’s also interesting to see these referred to as ‘technologies’. They are all certainly enabling technologies but the real value is in the content they allow to be more freely shared. In time the focus on these communications tactics as ‘technologies’ will fall into the background and the emphasis will be on the marketing and communication value that they promote.

Not every every tactic is right for every company but it is safe to say that video sharing should be at the top of any company’s list that is considering adopting new Web 2.0 tactics.

McKinsey chart

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr

Video 2.oh! – Modifying Video on-the-fly

A German firm with the enigmatic name Impossible Software has developed technology that allows you to modify video on the fly. An example is the ability to change the colour of a car, furniture or a piece of clothing as you are watching it. Network world has a good article that explains how the technology works. Better yet, go to the Impossible site (you have to be really, really good to live up to that name…) and give the demo a ride.

I don’t know when this new technology will be commercially available but the implications for interactive entertainment, for advertising, for any type of video are really significant. Interacting with an image that is placed on top of a video is one thing. Interacting with the video itself – that’s a game changer.

Share This
  • email
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • StumbleUpon
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr