On Sunday, March 24, 2013 11:53:32 PM UTC-5, Cedric Greevey wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 11:24 PM, Rich Morin <r...@cfcl.com > <javascript:>>wrote: > >> On Mar 24, 2013, at 18:44, Cedric Greevey wrote: >> > Where are these costs coming from? ... >> >> To get professional results, you need more than a camera >> on a tripod. For example, someone has to: >> >> * keep the camera on the speaker >> > > The speaker can stay approximately in one place, or, any random person can > be paid minimum wage to rotate the camera. Cost: $0-8 per hour. I'd not be > surprised if there are automated solutions for this, involving some > motorized gadget in the tripod head and some invisible-to-human-eyes mark > or reflector on the speaker's clothing perhaps, and then there'd be only a > one-time cost (plus some trivial amount of electricity). >
You have no idea what you're talking about. > > >> * get clean copies of the slides >> > > Whoever is giving the presentation should have these already. > > >> * merge the slides with the video >> > > A lot of computers are shipping with free no-frills video editing software > these days that probably suffices for this. > You have no idea what you're talking about. > >> * create assorted web pages, etc. >> > > Youtube will create a page for your video for you if you upload it there, > and a page for your channel/account/whatever listing all of your videos > that are uploaded to Youtube. There are other sites that will do similar > things. For ongoing series, there are sites optimized for that, too, > usually with .tv domains. > > >> * ... >> >> Outfits like InfoQ and Confreaks do a very good job, but >> they use professional staff (who expect to be paid). > > > And I'm guessing what they're doing is obsolescent, if not already > obsolete, in that it can be done about as well for a lot less money. If > they're charging $400 a video I smell a market ripe for disruption. > The example given was $400 for ALL videos, not per-video. > I'm > >> delighted that these folks provide high-quality recordings >> of talks, at no cost or inconvenience to me. > > > It seems that the delays before the videos get posted, and not having > control over when videos get posted, qualifies as an "inconvenience", or > this thread wouldn't exist. > It's also wonderful to have a local meeting recorded by a >> volunteer, but I _really_ don't want this to be the way our >> conferences are recorded. I can wait a bit for the editing; >> clean results are more important than saving a month or so. >> > > Why are you so convinced that a volunteer couldn't do a good job? > I would never say a volunteer couldn't do a good job. But given the kind of equipment and professionalism I've seen our video crews exhibit, I think there is a far higher chance of a consistent excellent result from professionals. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
