Tag Archives: video

YouTube is the second most visited website, after Google Search

Posted on by

First, a bit of history: Google Video was a free video hosting service launched on January 25, 2005. It allowed video clips to be hosted on Google servers and embedded on other websites. I seem to recall putting videos online before that but they were nasty little things about the size of a matchbook and took hours to create and upload. (Google Video made it SO much easier.) YouTube launched in February 2005 and was acquired by Google in October of 2006 ($1.65 billion in stock). Google shut down Google Videos in 2009.

I uploaded my first video to YouTube in February of 2006. In the ensuing 16 years I’ve uploaded 551 videos. It never occurred to me to “monetize” my videos so I’ve never paid much attention to the analytical data YouTube sends me every month. YouTube was just an easy way to stream videos using their embed code on my blog.

Today they sent my “2022 snapshot.” In the past 12 months my channel has had 53,000 views (50,000 “watch time minutes”). Over the course of the 16 years my videos have been viewed 1,066,666 times. And I’m not even trying (to influence or monetize).

Re-evaluating Flip HD

Posted on by

My initial impression of the Flip HD video camera was pretty positive. But the more I use it “in the field,” the more things I find that bother me. The audio is very poor when compared to my Casio EX-Z300 (a small still camera that also takes video). And in low light situations, the Flip really sucks, while the Casio is very forgiving. And if you don’t hold the Flip dead still, your video shakes like pup passing peach pits. Not so the Casio.

These cameras are comparable in price. I think you can get either for around $200. And I’m open to the possibility I’m not doing something right but these are pretty much idiot-proof cameras, so…

The 4 minute video above was shot on my Casio (by my friend Greg Perry) and edited in iMovie 09 (which I like much better than 08). He was also using the Flip. The difference was night and day. Couldn’t use the Flip stuff and the Casio came out okay. There’s some artifacts in the video above but I think that’s mostly YouTube compression. I’ll post the .mov file later if you want to download and take a look.

I still have the inauguration video I shot on the Flip HD so maybe I’ll see better results but I’m skeptical. If you I had to choose between the two cameras, it’s no contest: Casio wins hands down. And it records nice stills and audio. If you bought a Flip on my recommendation and aren’t happy with it, my apologies.

Flip HD

Posted on by
2

If you’d like to see/hear a side-by-side comparison, I’ve put both videos on this page. The first thing that jumps out at me is how much better the audio is on the Casio, even though it’s using a built-in mic like the Flip. And I think the quality of the video is a little better but that could be a function of how the two device encode for YouTube.

If you want to see the original, uncompressed video from the Flip, you can download the first 30 seconds (35 MB!). It’s not bad. NYT tech columnist David Pogue likes it, too. According to Pure Digital, (the makers of the Flip?) the little camera has 30% of the camcorder market.

YouTube switches to 16:9 player

Posted on by
1

I’ll have to play with this some more but, at first look, here are my options: If I want the ease and quality of the YouTube capture mode on the Casio, I have to go with 4:3 and get the vertical black panels in the new, wider YouTube player. The Casio has an HD/wide-screen setting, but it’s not YouTube ready. I’ll have to jump through all of the encoding hoops to get anything like the same quality. Easy choice.

Casio Exilim EX-Z300

Posted on by
2


Hmm. Not too bad. I’ll be curious to see if I lose anything by running the video through iMovie, which will be 99% of the time. But if someone wanted a camera that output files you could upload straight to YouTube, this is pretty good. I was really surprised by the quality of the audio on this test. The camera was sitting 3 feet away and the audio sounded damned good to me. I’ll get some stills in coming days and see if I can tell the difference between the previous model (3 megapixel?) and this one (10). They’ve also made some improvements in button placement and size. A very nice camera. Casio has done it again. More at Casio.com.