1.Where and when did usable online video start?
Well, we already leant in our lecture this week about Netflix. An online DVD store and streaming service that arrived on the scene in ’98. But in 1998 the world was not quite up to speed with broadband; we were still on dial-up, where downloading a webpage could mean a week waiting patiently at the screen, only to be disconnected by an incoming phone call.
In 2004 American’s had broadband, and things were getting much faster with “half of American homes reaching better than dial-up transfer rates, along with all the noise created by the blogs and pundits of the internet, an audience was born, capable and accustomed to online payments (i.e. market potential) and finally able to watch video, on demand by the masses.”
http://dembot.com/post/310798115/a-decade-in-history-of-online-video
Thus it can be determined that youtube was the first online, ‘useable’ video. Users could, not only watch, but also upload their own videos.
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?
What are they luring us from?
When I want to watch a movie, I have a few choices. I can go to the cinema and pay up to $20 to watch the latest and greatest on the big screen or I can sit snuggled up in bed and watch that same movie, admittedly in low quality - but completely free from my broadband-enabled laptop. So why on earth would I waste my time in the cinema and how has the cinema tried to keep bringing audiences back?
Advancements in cinema technology is one thing that pulled me away from my warm bed and the illegal video streaming websites (not that I would ever break a law, of course). When Avatar came out in 3D, there was so much hype around the fantastic technology I actually paid to see it! Imagine that.
Just as in 1952 when 3d was first introduced to lure audiences back to the big-screen, we are being lured by bigger and better versions of this. Don’t forget all the hype about ‘gold-class’ and ‘High-def” cinema? VIP membership cards and special premier viewings?
All clever methods the cinemas and studios have employed to keep audiences coming back again and again. By creating a cinema experience you can’t replicate at home studios have been luring us back time and time again.
3.Are short films still being made? Why? Who pays for them to be made?
Short films are made for a number of reasons. The short film
Short films are constantly being made by amateurs and professionals all over the world. I would personally categorise them into 3 main types; professional film makers who have a message to deliver or something to sell, amateurs who don’t really know what they are doing and idiots with a video camera. The last two are usually self funded, but the first, the professionals are where the money is.
Professional short films are showcased at festivals, one of the best exam
4.The term viral is thrown about adhoc but what does it mean in film/movie arena? Give some examples.
Short films with interesting, funny or unusual subject matter, have a tendency to ‘go viral’ on the internet. A viral video will “spread like a virus...you watch it. You like it and you pass it on to a friend or everyone you know. They watch and like it, then forward the link or clip to more people...”. Sometimes these videos are clips from real life, like someone falling off a bike or when Gordan Brown was caught out describing one particular supporter ‘bigoted woman’ when he thought the cameras were off:
Other viral videos are highly rehearsed, well produced and have the intention of reaching viral status. This video for example has almost 35 million views:
Although these videos are highly entertaining, they are often pointless forms of entertainments that take the audience’s attention away from legitimate short films with some level of intelligent though behind them. They may be funny, but they certainly aren’t doing anything great for the film arena
http://humor.about.com/od/video/f/whatviralvideos.htm
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.
Television shows are often available, not just on your TV set, but online as well. Audiences don’t have to worry if they miss their favourite TV show because they can just watch it online later anyway with resources like the BBC iPlayer. But from this, a different kind of show altogether has formed: the Webisode. Now ‘TV-show format’ films are being developed purely for distribution on the internet, giving TV producers and aspiring TV producers a chance to air their show and a platform for audience feedback.
Smosh.com is one, rather hilarious example of a Webisode. Two friends started regularly making TV-quality comic sketches that ended up going viral. The sheer lunacy of their ideas means that this program is not really fit for television audiences, but has millions of hits online. The video below where two boys dressed in boxes sing about transformers that “will punch you in the face!” for example has over half a million views:
On one hand, the webisode is a great platform for shows with unusual subject matter or a avenue for producers to showcase their talents or make money through advertising. On the other hand, we have the same problem as always with these short films, any idiot with a camera and a Youtube account can make their own webisoed – and cyber space is littered with them.
No comments:
Post a Comment