# The state of HTML5 Video

Uncategorized @ 30 January 2012, “No Comments”
It’s a year since Google told us that Chrome would be dropping HTML5 support for the mp4 h.264 codec in its native HTML5 video player.

It hasn’t happened yet, but at NextShoot we thought it would be a good time for a re-examination of the issues surrounding the HTML5 <video> roll out and the state of play.

There’s no doubt that the condition of native ‘in-browser’ video on the web is looking better these days. Two-thirds of browsers now support the HTML5 video tag. Support for video tag attributes has improved as well, with both Safari and Chrome offering full support and Firefox 10 (soon to be unleashed upon an update weary user base) supports, of all things, Full Screen! Incredible but true. Who would have thought that a button to let you decide what you see could have been such a source of consternation and a security issue to give the assembled brains of McAfee and Symantec sleepless nights?

However, with older versions of Internet Explorer still loitering (only IE 9 and up support the HTML5 video tag) Flash is still a requirement for viewing video.

As we’ve pointed out before, IE8 is to Windows 7 as IE6 was to XP, and so, for all the talk of ‘bring your own device’ (BYOD) the main and favoured point of access on a large organisation’s network is, and will continue to be for some time, IE8.

Couple that with the loss of enhanced functionality – statistics/engagement data, the lack of support for closed captions and audio descriptions in any browser, advertising support (beyond pre-roll) and, of great importance to the revenue models of content-driven online enterprises, the glaring holes in HTML5 video security, Flash will likely remain the only option for at least some portion of the web for some time.

The codec conflict is, unfortunately, no closer to resolution. For a programme that set out to simplify the process of getting video online, W3C and WHATWG’s floundering around this issue must stand out for criticism as an unforgivable failure – neither the end consumer or the content owner (let alone their tech providers) serves to realise any benefit from the current impasse. Whether you’re wary of the long-term intentions of the owners of proprietary codecs or the as yet unrevealed goals of Google’s WebM strategy, it doesn’t bode well for the bright new future of co-operation and brotherly love.

We’re of the opinion that mp4 h.264 offers the best quality to bandwidth option by a long run. Have you watched a video in .ogg? It’s like a return to the days of 56k connections and Windows Media Player. WebM is undoubtably improving but the chasm in quality of output may offer some explanation for Google’s reticence in making their codec the only HTML5 friendly choice in Chrome.

And so, again, Flash (which will play the mp4 h.264 codec in all browsers) still has the edge.

Adobe, in the meantime, have stated that Flash will now be desktop-centric and concentrate on premium content and gaming. In fact this coincides rather nicely with the announcement that the new generation of Android mobile devices will drop support for Flash.

It’s all very confusing. Add to this Apple’s abandonment of the video production industry with their laughably (if it wasn’t so expensive) bad new incarnation of Final Cut.

Is Apple banking on the next generation of online video being user-generated? Was it a tactical decision to drive their loyal regions of users into the warm embrace of Adobe Premiere? They did it once before with the rollout of OsX when the entire Print industry dropped Quark and bought InDesign and, let’s be honest, that decision to focus on the consumer didn’t harm their profile, share price or popularity.

Anyway, the figures can be seen here courtesy of the nice people at Long Tail Video, home of the JW Player.

The things that stand out for us?

- How little, despite their seeming popularity, the iPad/Andorid axis features in the figures. A combined total of 6%? Really? I think if the research was conducted solely in central London and Manhattan those numbers would be very different.

- Firefox’s support for WebM must be of huge consolation to Google and in terms of user inclusion puts it on an even footing with h.264 mp4 as the natural choice of codec for HTML5.

- The staggering inability of a new standard to adhere to anything resembling standards must be of particular note. Look at the figures on accessibility. This from an organisation that has been preaching about tagging images for the last decade…

- The main lesson though is that it seems Flash will be around for some time to come and that the ‘enhanced’ experience it offers won’t be there for mobile viewers of video until the industry can agree on cross platform standards. VHS? Betamax?

# Rupert Sanderson Window at Selfridge

Uncategorized @ 29 November 2011, “No Comments”

# Sass & Bide shoot at London Fashion Week

Fashion, Retail @ 06 October 2011, “No Comments”

Sass & Bide press pack at London Fashion Week

Our tireless filmmaker, Fabio, beneath the arrow

Sass & Bide audience at London Fashion Week

# Dominic West Outtakes

Publishing, Uncategorized @ 06 October 2011, “No Comments”

A little while back, we recorded Dominic West, star of US blockbuster ‘The Wire’, reading from Charles Cumming’s new novel ‘The Trinity Six’. This outtakes video has just been released to coincide with the publication of the paperback version of the novel.

# NextShoot talks to Miranda Donovan, rising star of the UK art scene

Arts, Interviews @ 20 September 2011, “No Comments”

Miranda’s work addresses the darker sides of civilisation and its decay. This beautiful video shows the artist at work in her studio, and out in the urban environment from where Miranda draws much of her inspiration.

# Customer Case Study / Informa

Case Study, Online Video @ 13 May 2011, “No Comments”

By Mike MacNamara

Multinational media and publishing company, Informa, recognise that video is the most effective and engaging way of communicating opinions and news to their subscribers. Working closely with Informa, we continue to deliver video content for a range of publications in various sectors.

From producing editorial video content for businesses to videoing industry events, we have created effective formats that work both for the company as a whole and specifically for its individual publications, which include Lloyd’s List, Lloyd’s Intelligence, International Freight Weekly, and more. Subscribers view video content as a great added value and enjoy seeing and hearing the professionals whose opinions they have only previously read.

“The guys at Next Shoot have produced some fantastic promotional videos for us,” says Matthew Tainton, Senior Marketing Executive, Lloyd’s List Intelligence. “They’re a really easy team to work with, and have a great understanding of how to get the best out of the people in front of the camera. The final videos look very professional and are great quality, all at a very competitive cost.

To find out more about how we’re producing website video content for businesses across London and the UK visit our customer Case Study page

# Video Advertising, Customization and Other Opportunities: YouTube v Video Platforms

Online Video, Viral Video @ 24 February 2011, “No Comments”

As promised, the continuation of our post about the advantages of YouTube versus using an online video platform to host your video. Last time we discussed the relative reach and costs of both solutions, now we turn our attention to YouTube’s advertising policies, the potential benefits of becoming a YouTube partner and finally we look at customizing the YouTube player to match the look of your own site…

Google does not monetize all content on YouTube. Estimates put it at anywhere between 3-15% of all views on the site. By default, user content is not monetized by showing ads – unless you have a hamster that can play recorder you’ll never hear from the sales team.

If advertisers do not want to be associated with the user generated content on YouTube — simply put, they won’t.

One exception applies, though: if users use copyrighted materials in their videos (i.e. use copyrighted music, or upload film trailers) then ads may well appear. This is down to the video recognition system Google/YouTube uses – if you don’t believe me try uploading the same piece of video to your account twice.

Aside from this watermarking technology on copyrighted material, YouTube only monetizes partner content.

Monetization of video is primarily limited to advertising on YouTube. Google does not allow brand channel owners to buy advertising for display within their own content.

Therefore, if you plan to use video to enable people to purchase products or services on your site, or you run your own advertising network, you are probably better off developing something yourself.

And so to Partner Content…

YouTube offers three different kinds of channel. There’s the standard channel like the one we use, ‘Brand Channels’ and ‘Partner Channels’ differ from the normal user experience in terms of design/ownership, functionality and cost/revenue models.

Content from these partner channels is a key source of income for Google. This income is regulated by the contract that Google signs with parties who have interesting content that Google believes will drive advertising on YouTube.

Partners can be both professional media companies and YouTube viral hits.

Adverts placed around partner content are bought by advertisers looking to drive traffic back to their own sites.

Google offers these ‘Brand Channels’ to advertisers who are willing to commit media to YouTube and other sites within the Google Content Network – it’s difficult to confirm but the minimum spend is approx. £20k per quarter.

Adverts do not link back to the advertiser’s site, but are required to drive traffic to the YouTube brand channel.

This media investment is required to kick-start the channel. Average click-is about 0.2% so brands should not expect masses of traffic on their channel from the ads alone.

The extra design and functional features of a brand channel compared to a user channel are nonetheless worthwhile for brand owners: it provides a more professional image and leads to additional video views by having the “More from this channel” box expanded by default on YouTube’s watch page

Branded Players

Player customization can provide best results if you build it from scratch in flash. Although YouTube and other video sharing sites allow for some level of player customization it is quite basic. The chromeless player is about as close as you can get to the bespoke players offered by video platforms.

An often-heard argument is that brand owners want to prevent ‘related items’ from showing up in the embedded player on their own site, the fear being that if your competitor has uploaded videos to YouTube as well, they may end up being played on your website.

YouTube have addressed this. Simply by appending ’&rel=0&showsearch=0’ to the embed code on your own site or deselecting the option ‘Include related videos’ from the embed code customization menu, related content will not be displayed on your site.

So, now you can have a player that looks a little bit more like your site and stop it pumping out competitors’ videos. Next time we’ll discuss stats and social networking.

Tags: , , ,

# To host or post…

Online Video, Viral Video @ 22 February 2011, “2 Comments”

Once we’ve produced your web video you have a key decision to make: to host or post?

In other words, should you host video on your own site using a video platform and absorb the expense that incurs or post the content to video sharing sites like YouTube?
The trade off is essentially one of views v traffic – YouTube is the most popular website after Google – it actually gets more searches than Yahoo – but the viewer isn’t on your site, with your shopping basket. They’re on a sharing site that wants to keep them there and will be showing them videos of related products – presumably those of your competitors. But can you take as simple an outlook as viewing a visit to your site as more valuable than a view of your video elsewhere? A better understanding of how we can leverage the massive reach of video sharing sites is essential to making a decision that’s right for your business. As well as the obvious advantages we need to weigh the benefits and limitations of both solutions with regards to cost, effectiveness, availability and ultimately what will deliver for you.
Getting Seen

Online video advertising is about promoting your brands, products or services with video.
Unlike traditional broadcasting online videos are not simply thrown in between the content people actually wanted to see – the TV advert or top and tail either side of the football – people will actually come looking for your video.
Therefore online video marketing is about creating content that will be found, watched and shared by an audience that wants to see it. Your content should be compelling and be informed by this raison d’etre.
In addition to getting your message across and determining the best way to do that, we also need to consider its availability and its cost. It has to pay for itself and more and it needs to be available to all users, across all platforms all the time. No one is doubting the reach of YouTube et al but over the next few posts we’ll be looking at the pros and cons, what’s possible and finally even making some suggestions for how you might want to proceed.
Cost

Online video costs tend to increase as you get more views. If you use a video platform cost can be an issue. This is not the case on video sharing sites, other than the cost it takes to create and manage the content. Most video sharing sites are free although some impose limitations and charge for extra features. Whether this will continue to be the case remains to be seen.
On YouTube, user channels are free. Originally, the terms of service stipulated that you could not use the platform for commercial purposes. These rules were never strictly adhered to.
For now, there is no limit to how many videos you can post to YouTube though the current time limit per video for the vast majority of users is 15 minutes. On your own platform, the limits are determined by the license terms of your video platform though usually the duration of a single file is not limited.
The overall storage allocation you are given may vary (from the downright stingy to unlimited) but can always be increased.
Next post, more on this as we look at the commercial context and the sharing sites’ advertising policies around your video and even consider the possibility of becoming a YouTube Partner Channel…
Tags: , , , , , , ,

# Why Your Business Must Have Online Video in 2011

Uncategorized @ 13 January 2011, “No Comments”
At the end of last year YouTube announced that in 2010 its users watched 700 billion videos, and over the course of the year 13 million hours of video content was uploaded to the site. Don’t believe it? Take a look:
Still don’t believe it? Well, I can’t help you with that. All I can say is that these astounding numbers demonstrate the amazing growth of digital media, because it means that the average internet user watched more than 300 online videos on YouTube (and that’s YouTube alone!) in 2010.
The difference between now and when YouTube was founded (in 2005) is that video is much easier to share online and has now emerged as a powerful medium to connect with customers. Video streaming is easier and more accessible due to increased internet connection speeds, and (most importantly) video creation has also become much easier and more affordable. YouTube took better advantage of the shift than anyone else, and now serves 38% of all videos in the US. Abroad and in the UK, their share is even higher.
The main upshot of the shift for marketers and businesses is the increased importance of online video in connecting with target audiences. It has now become simpler than ever before to use video to connect with customers, and creating video that represents your business is the ideal opportunity to connect in a popular and personable way. Company profiles, case studies and customer testimonials are all great ways of making use of the direct and personal nature of video to communicate company messages. It has become clear that the impact of video communication is far greater than written descriptions or testimonials of your business.
Whatever line of business you’re in, if you have a web presence then video has to be part of it. Consumer habits have shifted to embrace the medium, and with more and more internet users seeking information on products and services through video on the web, the trend looks set to continue across all platforms – not just on YouTube.
Have a look at some ways of promoting your business here:

# Google Place Search – finding local businesses

Uncategorized @ 10 December 2010, “No Comments”
A couple of months ago, Google launched Place Search, a complete overhaul of the way in which they display local business search results. The listings 7-pack has gone, and each result has a much more substantial quantity of information, including images, and where applicable… video! Each listing has results from the major directories, so video-rich directories will vastly increase the visibility and ranking of their listed businesses.
Take a look at the video about Place Search:
A great blog post to learn about how it all works -
« Previous Entries