Proposition: a new video workflow tutorial website

Feb 23, 2011 7:47 PM

• 

  Currently Being Moderated

  15. Chuck A. McIntyre,

  

  Feb 24, 2011 2:37 PM   in reply to Colin Brougham

  Report

  I work on websites as well as video.  Recently, I have spent some time in the Dreamweaver forum, getting ideas related to a CMS solution for a client.  Like sports fans, everyone has their workflow, team and strategy.  There's a lot of stuff to sort through.

   

  I think for this type of project, the consensus in the Dreamweaver forum at least, would be WordPress.  Personally, I build all of my websites from scratch.  I like the direct approach from PhotoShop, Fireworks, Flash and Dreamweaver.  In this case though, a CMS is probably the best solution.

    Submit

  |

  Mark as:
• 

  Currently Being Moderated

  16. Jeff Bellune,

  

  Feb 24, 2011 3:31 PM   in reply to Jim Simon

  Report

  Jim,

   

  I've spent a few hours (well, more than a few) recently trying to tweak the settings for v 0.25 of the HC Encoder.  I've finally gotten it to produce output as clean as Squeeze by Grape Smoothing the source between 20 and 30.  With a DI as the AviSource for the AviSynth script, it's at least 30% faster than Squeeze, often encoding SD source video at 70 - 90 fps.  I'm pleased with the results.

   

  One thing that baffles me, though, is that it is dog slow when  the hd2sd or dv2film filters are included in the script.  This is with or without MT.  So the same script that runs at 30+ fps in VirtualDub will only run at 6 fps in HC.  I have SMP selected and HC sees all 8 of my cores.

   

  I don't want to pull this thread too far off-topic, but if you've got any ideas about why the slowdown exists or how to fix it, I'd like to hear them.  It'll help when I make a tutorial about using HC.  If you get a chance, please PM me.  Thanks.

   

  -Jeff

    Submit

  |

  Mark as:
• 

  Currently Being Moderated

  17. Colin Brougham,

  

  Mar 2, 2011 7:15 AM   in reply to Colin Brougham

  Report

  After some more consideration of this, I've decided to shelve the idea. It's not that I don't want to, or that the work involved would be too much--there are a number of other reasons and factors--but ultimately, I don't think I'm really qualified to be making workflow suggestions in this manner. Offering thoughts and ideas on the forum is one thing, and I'll keep doing that, but creating a specific location for my own workflows isn't appropriate. I'll just continue to be annoyed by the vast majority of tutorials I find

   

  Thanks everyone for your thoughts and comments. Maybe in another time this will bear fruit... but not now.

    Submit

  |

  Mark as:
• 

  Currently Being Moderated

  18. Jeff Bellune,

  

  Mar 2, 2011 7:55 AM   in reply to Colin Brougham

  Report

  I, however, will continue to post tutorials on my web site, albeit slowly because that's just how I roll.

   

  -Jeff

    Submit

  |

  Mark as:
• 

  Currently Being Moderated

  19. Colin Brougham,

  

  Mar 2, 2011 8:07 AM   in reply to Jeff Bellune

  Report

  You're better at it, anyway. I'd just be providing the Brand X variety of tutorials

    Submit

  |

  Mark as:
• 

  Currently Being Moderated

  20. Jeff Bellune,

  

  Mar 2, 2011 8:37 AM   in reply to Colin Brougham

  Report

  

  <blush>

   

  -Jeff

    Submit

  |

  Mark as:
• 

  Currently Being Moderated

  21. Daniel Greeney,

  

  Mar 2, 2011 9:36 AM   in reply to Colin Brougham

  Report

  Hi Colin,

  I sent you a Private message.  Just checking to see if you got it, and if you're the same Colin Brougham who went to MSU.

   

   

  Dan

    Submit

  |

  Mark as:
• 

  Currently Being Moderated

  22. Bill Hunt,

  

  Mar 2, 2011 1:31 PM   in reply to Daniel Greeney

  Report

  you're the same Colin Brougham who went to MSU

   

  "MSU?" Do you mean Mississippi State University? The Bulldogs? Is Colin a Bulldog? Colin, why did you not tell me?

   

  Hunt

    Submit

  |

  Mark as:
• 

  Currently Being Moderated

  23. Daniel Greeney,

  

  Mar 2, 2011 4:52 PM   in reply to Bill Hunt

  Report

  I actually meant Michigan State University.  Hope I have the right guy.

   

   

  Dan

    Submit

  |

  Mark as:
• 

  Currently Being Moderated

  24. Christopher Duncan,

  

  Mar 2, 2011 6:11 PM   in reply to Colin Brougham

  Report

  Colin,

   

  Just wanted to chime in with the others to say great idea. Regarding platforms, while there are plenty of ways to embed video on a web site, you might consider simply putting them on youtube or vimeo and putting embeds on your site. This approach has several benefits.

   

  First, if you're putting the videos on your site, you're going to incur the bandwidth of streaming them, which can be considerable if you meet with success. That means eventually getting into additional charges from your ISP for the higher bandwidth. With youtube / vimeo, they're actually doing the streaming even if the user is clicking on a player on your web site, so they're paying thet freight for the streaming.

   

  Also, you can count on these sites to make their embedded players play nice with Apple devices that don't support flash, various mobile gizmos, etc. so that you don't have to maintain a dozen versions of each video. You simply upload it, add the embed to your web site, and you're done.

   

  Count me in for sending you traffic!

    Submit

  |

  Mark as: