Edited youtube videos

Discussion in 'Amateur Video Production' started by domino crew, Jun 22, 2006.

  1. domino crew

    domino crew Guest

    Hi,
    sorry to jump in like this,
    but we would like to share this editing experiment we did, only with
    youtube videos and a professional avid,

    let us know if you like it




    domino crew
     
    domino crew, Jun 22, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Personally I can see nothing about the clip that is unique. Having clips run
    at fast speed and slow mo has been done to death. Yet, every novice with
    editing software does it thinking it's really cool. The idea is good when
    used in moderation.

    The next thing that bothers me is the use of the PIP's which never change in
    size or position. Again, this is a nice effect when done properly. Maybe you
    should watch a few more episodes of 24. When using PIP's it is more
    interesting if they change size and position while at the same time keeping
    certain subjects with those that have made the position/size switch.

    Whether you have the pro version of AVID make no difference. You have not
    utilized anything within the program which cannot be done in 99% of other
    NLE software! Having a better software package does not make up for lack of
    creativity. Sorry if that's not what you wanted to hear, but it's just a
    simple truth. I am sure you are entertained by this example you have created
    based on the fact you are the creator, and are proud to have AVID software.
    But, the piece is boring.

    Move your PIP's to different positions occasionally. Change their sizes now
    and again. Make those cuts match the beats or crescendo's of the music.
    Bring some feature to the forefront to make a point to the viewer that has
    something bearing on the music subject matter. Give the viewer a reason to
    understand why these elements are placed in front of them. Make them know
    your message without having to think about it.

    Just my 2 cents. You need to go back and make it better.
    --
    Larry Johnson
    Digital Video Solutions

    http://www.digitalvideosolutions.com
    877-227-6281 Toll Free Sales Assistance
    386-672-1941 Customer Service
    386-672-1907 Technical Support
    386-676-1515 Fax
     
    Larry Johnson, Jun 22, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. All what Larry's said. Learn from criticisms. Don't see them as negative,
    but as an impulse to make something better. I know, the first time it
    hurts, but you get used to it :) We all have felt that pain when someone
    criticised our first edit-effort with which we went in the public, but that
    didn't deter us from continuing editing :)

    cheers

    -martin-
     
    Martin Heffels, Jun 22, 2006
    #3
  4. domino crew

    domino crew Guest

    no no no,
    I thank you both for these llines,

    but if you may care, I could also try to answer,

    what is new about that ?
    each of the video used had been uploaded from different coners of the
    planet, none is covered by copyright, and are just out of 45 milions of
    their kind,

    all your cents are of great value and I ll listen to them

    but let me invite you to focus on the medium and less on the message
    if you care
     
    domino crew, Jun 23, 2006
    #4
  5. domino crew

    PTravel Guest

    What makes you think none are protected by copyright?
     
    PTravel, Jun 23, 2006
    #5
  6. domino crew

    domino crew Guest

    well it s pretty simple,
    if you do something only for the web, it s an autmatic copyleft,
    there is no way anyone can use it without copying it, technically even
    streaming is a copy,

    plus there are no money involved, is free for all and each
     
    domino crew, Jun 23, 2006
    #6
  7. domino crew

    PTravel Guest

    It is if you know copyright law. Unfortunately, you do not.
    Absolutely wrong. Any work fixed in a tangible medium is protected by
    copyright. Those rights are not waived by posting something on the web.
    That's right, but viewing streamed video is an authorized copy.
    Infringement, by definition, is making an unauthorized copy. If you did not
    obtain permission for your video, your use of the videos of others
    constitutes copyright infringement on several levels: you've made an
    unauthorized copy, you've made a derivative work, you've distributed the
    work, and you've publicly performed it, all of which are reserved rights.
    It doesn't matter. It doesn't have to be commerical to be infringing.
     
    PTravel, Jun 23, 2006
    #7
  8. domino crew

    domino crew Guest

    Sorry you are so upset with the planet, it must be sad

    anyway

    it is not like you say

    1) anyone subscribed to youtube can dowload any video, you accept it
    when you sign in
    2) you can choose to post a video privatly, but in that case nobody can
    watch it, but your choosen. by leaving it public you agree that anyone
    can copy it.
    3) as per the derivative work issue. we've sent email to any of the
    video used, just to thank them.nobody complained


    but again

    you seams on the edge of a nervous breackdown
    do you wanna talk ?
     
    domino crew, Jun 23, 2006
    #8
  9. Nominated for clueless posting of the month.
     
    Richard Crowley, Jun 23, 2006
    #9
  10. domino crew

    Mike Fields Guest

    Seconded !!!
     
    Mike Fields, Jun 23, 2006
    #10
  11. domino crew

    Kill Bill Guest

    Perhaps youd better check the planet your on.
    So, I'm walking down the street, I find a wallet on the ground. I find
    an ID card in the wallet.. I should then take all the money in that
    wallet.. because I just happen to find myself in the right place to find
    the wallet.. huh?
    You can play a DVD privately.. It doesn't make it your content. And, if
    I happen to leave that DVD on my desk at work, it's ok for someone too
    steel it and copy the content?
    So they didn't respond to your attempt to contact them telling them you
    are ripping them off.. This makes it ok in your mind?


    Must be the "gimee generation"


    This all reminds me of the time years ago when I heard someone say they
    don't want to pay for a bus ticket, because the bus is going their any
    ways.. so why not just let them on it.

    clueless... indeed.. I too nominate! :)

    -bill
     
    Kill Bill, Jun 23, 2006
    #11
  12. domino crew

    domino crew Guest

    again and for the last time,

    that it s turnig quite boring,


    a wallet is a phisical object, a file is not.
    if you take a wallet from me I don t have anymore wallet.
    if you take a file from me we both have a file

    if you sign in a place where you accept to share any of the file you
    upload,
    well you accept to share any of the file that you will upload.

    if you don t want to share, don t sign in and don t upload any file, is
    it simple enough ?

    if you feel like this is a wierd practice and is goin to corrupt our
    moral values,
    well you may be right, as well as those who thinks that distribution
    costs and companies are the only money in the enternteinment buisness,
    where musicians and artists get paied almost nothing of the total
    volume.

    if this is clueless for you, again I am very very sorry and it make me
    sad,
    you are defending a system of monopoles that is not even yours,

    the copyright is a real issue now, and we need some new ways of dealing
    with it in digital spaces,

    but you acting like this doesn t bring any space for dialogue.

    you know when gutenberg invented the printing press, the firts printed
    books (copies of the bible), brought to a religios war ? and a lot of
    people was screaming "books are not for everyone !!! It is not like you
    can read the holy text and use it the way you like !!!" "books MUST be
    handcopied by priests !!!!!"


    just try to open up a bit, nobody is hurt here
    and the problem remain there even if you spit on it
     
    domino crew, Jun 23, 2006
    #12
  13. domino crew

    PTravel Guest

    Whose upset?
    Want to bet?

    That's right -- anyone can. You didn't just download videos. You prepared
    derivative works.
    Nope. Here are the terms of use from YouTube:

    "The content on the YouTube Website, except all User Submissions (as defined
    below), including without limitation, the text, software, scripts, graphics,
    photos, sounds, music, videos, interactive features and the like ("Content")
    and the trademarks, service marks and logos contained therein ("Marks"), are
    owned by or licensed to YouTube, subject to copyright and other intellectual
    property rights under United States and foreign laws and international
    conventions. Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your
    information and personal use only and may not be used, copied, reproduced,
    distributed, transmitted, broadcast, displayed, sold, licensed, or otherwise
    exploited for any other purposes whatsoever without the prior written
    consent of the respective owners."

    I'll repeat the relevant part, since you've evidently missed it:

    Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and
    personal use only and may not be used, copied, reproduced, distributed,
    transmitted, broadcast, displayed, sold, licensed, or otherwise exploited
    for any other purposes whatsoever without the prior written consent of the
    respective owners.

    So what?
    Hardly. Because I'm a licensed intellectual property lawyer, when I see
    people write nonsense about copyright, such as you did, I'll always correct
    it so that others aren't mislead. Your claim about the law was wrong,
    remains wrong, and, apparently, your immune to correction and education.
    However, as I said, my response to your post wasn't for your benefit.
     
    PTravel, Jun 23, 2006
    #13
  14. domino crew

    PTravel Guest

    "Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and
    personal use only and may not be used, copied, reproduced, distributed,
    transmitted, broadcast, displayed, sold, licensed, or otherwise exploited
    for any other purposes whatsoever without the prior written consent of the
    respective owners."

    http://www.youtube.com/t/terms

    What part of this don't you understand?
    If you don't want to comply with the terms of use and copyright law, don't
    log on. Is that simple enough?
    Ah, I see -- yet another one who justifies intellectual property theft.
    Well, perhaps before you start proposing ways of "dealing" with copyright,
    you should understand it. Clearly you do not.

    What has that to do with anything?
    What everyone here finds so . . . um . . . amusing . . . is your complete
    and total ignorance of that which you criticize. Nonetheless, feel free to
    post your opinions. After all, it's just Usenet. However, expect to get
    jumped on, and hard, if you persist in presenting fantasy and fiction as
    fact with respect to the law.
     
    PTravel, Jun 23, 2006
    #14
  15. domino crew

    domino crew Guest

  16. domino crew

    PTravel Guest

    Spend a little time on google and you can find my credentials.

    I don't know why it's always the "copyright is a morally wrong" crowd who
    think they understand law better than the professionals who practice it full
    time. Know this: I don't support or disapprove of copyright law, and I
    certainly don't make the law. I merely understand it, and apply it on
    behalf of my clients.

    You are not my client, so this is not legal advice. Consider it personal
    advice. It is obvious that you don't understand copyright law at all (nor
    do you understand contract law, or you would have understood the YouTube
    terms of use). The problem is not that you're ignorant of the law, but that
    you value that ignorance, which makes you dangerous to yourself. As I said,
    you're not my client, so that doesn't matter to me in the least. However,
    if you persist in misstating the law and I believe that others will be
    mislead by your misstatements, I will continue to correct your errors, and
    you may expect that I will become increasingly less gentle as I do.

    This is an appropriate time for you to withdraw or, at least, confine
    yourself to discussing video.
     
    PTravel, Jun 23, 2006
    #16
  17. Geez, give it a rest. If the OP is using copyrighted material and is
    clueless then just leave it at that! Should something come of it in
    accordance to the copyright, then so be it. If it happens to be anyone out
    there reading this, then give him his just rewards when the time comes.

    BUT, the fact remains that the production quality of the the OP's video
    posting simply was not up to par. Regardless of the content of the
    individual PIP's the production was NOT interesting. People are not going to
    respond to the content of the PIP's based on that alone. The content of the
    PIP's needs to be continually brought to the forefront. When the subject
    changes in the main PIP then the one's being repeated should become
    secondary.

    It is of no use to continue to use the aerial clip at the size it is within
    these PIP's when it detracts from the content the OP says is so important
    because of its' global impact. What the OP has done in the product is to
    keep the content at a constant battle with other images for the viewers
    attention. If the content is SO important bring that to the forefront while
    repeating the other stuff in background PIP's. You MUST draw the attention
    of the viewer to the things you see as being IMPORTANT to the overall
    production.

    Again, GO BACK AND MAKE IT BETTER. Right now, and again regardless of the
    global emphasis of the content, the production SUCKS!!!! If you were to put
    that product on a DVD for sale no one would buy it. If you think I am wrong,
    put it on a DVD and see how many your sell.

    In additon, IF you are using copyrighted content, then you will get away
    with it for just so long until International Authorities catch up with you!!
    Regardless of whether you believe is will happen or not.

    My other 2 cents, which by the way is free of copyright law and is governed
    by presonal experience and the knowledge of what is and is not boring in
    video production.

    Small things amuse small minds.... I see the OP has amused himself!!!
    --
    Larry Johnson
    Digital Video Solutions

    http://www.digitalvideosolutions.com
    877-227-6281 Toll Free Sales Assistance
    386-672-1941 Customer Service
    386-672-1907 Technical Support
    386-676-1515 Fax
     
    Larry Johnson, Jun 23, 2006
    #17
  18. domino crew

    domino crew Guest

    guys you work too much


    PTravel,
    I never claimed to be a copyright expert, neither I ever said copyright
    is morally wrong.
    All I said is that copyright has been created when the printing press
    has been invented, correct me if I am wrong, and that now a day is of
    no use, because we invented something else, that is totally different
    from paper and phisical copies.

    In no circustances did I ever tought or imagined to make a penny from
    this, that is just a couple of afternoon spend at a workstation

    my interest was and is in exploring what the hell is goin on today, and
    I thank you all because your reaction really gave me a lot to think
    about


    most of the videos in youtube are designed to e downloaded into
    ipod-video, people are mostly competing to be the most downloaded video
    inthere, they even apologies when their videos are not in mp4, ready
    for ipod format.
    I understand this is a wierd perspective for companies that spend a lot
    of money in producing a movie, but is quite normal for people who just
    play with their webcams to send anything to the world. as it is for the
    most of the video we used. the rest is just a short clip from a wide
    spread trailers, heavily manipulated and representing less the 0,01% of
    the original work, or a movie from 1978 that the director himeself gave
    away to the public. I will call this fair use, till further notice, if
    anyone want to complain I am ready to face any consequence.

    but again, sooner or later we need to have a new copyright, and people
    like you, PTravel are of great importance in finding how to change it.

    Larry Johnson, your passion amuses me, I promise to follow you advice
    and will work on something better as soon as I ll have access to
    machines. This has been a test for a collaborative work with an editor
    with whome I am goin to edit my first short movie soon, no PIP will be
    involved don t worry.

    I hope no one is goin to feel offended from this post, it is quite hard
    to handle each one of you

    cheers
     
    domino crew, Jun 24, 2006
    #18
  19. domino crew

    PTravel Guest

    Okay. You're wrong. Copyright began with the Statute of Anne in 1710.
    Still wrong. Copyright protects works of authorship fixed in a tangible
    medium -- it doesn't matter what medium. The purpose of copyright is as an
    incentive to creation. If you're an American, take a look at Article I,
    Section 8 of the Constitution.
    Again, it doesn't matter. Copyright gives authors exclusive rights in their
    works. They have an absolute right to preclude trespass on the reserved
    rights (which include the right to prepare derivative works, the right to
    make copies, the right to distribute and the right to publicly perform),
    regardless of whether the trespasser is making money from the infringement
    or not.
    Yes. That's an _authorized_ use. What you did was an _unauthorized_ use.
    Did you obtain permission? No? Then you infringed.
    Not that heavily manipulated, but I'll confine myself to addressing the
    copyright issues.
    Doesn't matter. The test (in the context of fair use) isn't how little of
    the original you've used, but how much of the infringing work it represents.
    In your case, the infringed material represents all of it.
    Really? What movie from 1978 was expressly dedicated to the public domain?
    Was this a commercial release? If so, the director doesn't own the
    copyrights.
    You can call it whatever you want. It's still not fair use.
    That's not the point. I don't care whether you infringe or not, or whether
    you get sued or not. I do care when you try to justify what you do by
    making blatantly erroneous statements about law -- something you persist in
    doing.
    There are problems with copyright law, but the problems are related to the
    traditional grant of exclusive rights. The biggest problem is that it is
    now written by lobbyists to further the interests of specific very large
    content producers, resulting in bad laws like the DMCA and the ridiculous
    Mickey Mouse copyright term extension. The solution, however, is not to
    trash copyright law, but to trash Congress.
     
    PTravel, Jun 24, 2006
    #19
  20. domino crew

    domino crew Guest

    please just google copyright history, or I can do for you the 'I am
    feeling lucky'

    http://www.patent.gov.uk/copy/history/index.htm


    copyright has been created when copies started to be made, and that has
    been possible with the printing press, it took more than a century to
    have presses around and to make copies an issue for congresses
    If you are american, learn from pre-columbus history,


    when did electricity started to be a tangible medium ?!



    when someone beg you to download his/her video, it may be because
    he/she is giving permission

    I understand you have enough freedom of mind to contest the 'system' as
    a whole,
    but you apply it like a clock worker in 'metropolis'


    it goes no where here

    ciao
     
    domino crew, Jun 24, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.