Vlogs are great but I wish someone would come up with a “vlog” only website meaning main entries are done in VLOG, and all comments are done in video as well.
It seems ironic that we do VLOGS but all the comments are done in english. Yes, I know it may be a quick and easy way to leave comments. The reality is, it cannot be done as far as I know. Many people have videophones now, so it would be great if we could make a vp call to a website and leave a comment! This is something the telecommunication industry should think about. I am just swinging for the fences here, but if we could use VRS companies to voice/caption our ASL, we could use the VRS interpreters as well. I’d love this wide open access to information for all signers and automatically have voice and caption added when we make a video for the internet. It’s probably wishful thinking, but what is the deal with doing VLOGS then limited to only using english to leave comments?
This would benefit hearing people as well because they can do a vlog without signing and people can pick up the non-verbal communication, then readers can respond with a video of their own in response. In both situations, a hearing person will be able to pick up all the non-verbal communication.
Hopefully someone out there will read this and have an idea of how to enable comments where people can leave a video as a response!
Interesting idea. I got a missed vp call video message yesterday. I actually did think about that, requiring all responses in my blog comments only to be via vlogs, but I realize I’ll get a few readers who will be able to do just that. Not everyone can/want to vlog. At times, people do post vlog link responses in my comment boxes. When they do, it’s pretty cool. I talked about this in my DV-thread post.
Comment by drmzz — February 20, 2007 @ 11:55 am
isnt there now videomail?
didnt comcast announce it??
that might work
Comment by matt — February 20, 2007 @ 1:04 pm
Video responses have started up in a way on Google Video which allows you to attach a video reply to a posted video. It’s coming along, I think.
In an individual blog, though there are some storage issues to consider…It would take up a lot of space to host video replies, especially if the person rambles all over or something. So having it integrated into something like this will likely take longer to happen — when you get terabytes of space on free accounts, I suppose
Comment by browneyedgirl65 — February 20, 2007 @ 2:09 pm
We are getting there. At the same time, isnt it nice to be bilingual — viewing in ASL and replying in English, the best we can. But before you know it, language choices will be much more flexible.
Comment by Jay — February 20, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
I hate to be the bad news bear here, but I cannot see this ever materializing. If we all used this line of reasoning, then the internet’s useful days would be numbered. Based on its current infrastructure, the internet cannot withstand any more bandwidth sapping by the constant streaming of videos alla YouTube/Google Video. Keep this up and you might just notice upstream bandwidth caps on household broadband appearing as soon as Q4 of 2008, even for premium services such as FIOS. Let’s go back to the fundamentals of blogging people, and stick with good old fashioned text. I mean, nothing arouses me more than lineart anyway. Lesson: If it ain’t broke, don’t convert it to mpeg-4 and stream it over the internet, selfishly sapping everyone else’s connection speed.
Just a thought,
- Victoria
Comment by Victoria Sutherland — February 21, 2007 @ 2:15 am
I agree about us being able to leave video responses to vlogs. That probably would be a great thing here.
BUT, I have a different beef about our new vlogs these days. We still aren’t at equal access with blogs that use English. I personally myself don’t watch too much vlogs because it wastes my time. A lot of times I open a vlog and it’s not interesting to me but I still watch it because “you never know it may turn interesting later”. Most of the time it doesn’t. With English blogs, I can skim. I can just quickly skim down and if I find an interesting part, I slow down and READ.
Not only that, we also need more experince or training on vlogs. I know it’s a whole new thing and that’s part of the process but I am bringing this to light now. A lot of vlogs are pointless. They just blab their way wasting time on the video. Some blogs do blab too and the majority of the people are able to giggle and skim that part. I think that if a vlog is to be made, it should be right to the point and clear. That’s another issue - signing in front of a video camera is not the same as signing with someone. It needs to be very clear as well to be seen in 2D.
My ideas to solve those problems - perhaps a deaf person could create a website like youtube.com or work with them to enable us to fastforward vlogs with different speeds just like a dvd. We would be able to “skim” ASL and slow down if something comes up interesting. As for quality of comments and sign - that probably would come with time when we all wear out the excitement of vlogs but maybe provide some training as well?
Comment by Bucky the GREAT — February 21, 2007 @ 9:04 am
Bucky,
The BIGGEST problem with VLOGS is, we cannot do a search on the actual signing of VLOGS. For english text, we can use the search command for keywords and find it. How can we do this with a VLOG and skip right to that part. There are some videos where you can “2x fast forward” and still be able to read the signs or even the captioning. My tivo has this, so to save time I would watch shows in 2x format and read the captioning fast. I don’t recall seeing a vlog in this format though, and it could be useful if some signers are slow by nature.
Victoria,
Back in the old days, like 1992, computers only had like 60mb of memory, dial up speed was very painful and over the years, more memory are used up and connection speeds increase exponentially. We can’t think about future bandwidth keeping current speeds in mind. If anything, i think text could be obsolete in the future of internet and more video will be used. When I go to CNN.com, I want to read a story about something, I usually get a video instead. Video in this case will still have a problem of being skimmed over like Bucky mentioned. Perhaps, Deaf people will use voice recognition software, which is currently available now, to use in lieu of captioning.
I don’t follow technology, but I think there are ‘different” speeds the internet is connected and apparently designers have found a way for much faster access that everyone can use all the multimedia resources without any lag time. I don’t remember if this is the right info, but videoconference in HD format would be easily handled on this new internet cable. Technology will always improve and who knows if text will be utilized more or less in the future.
Comment by deafphilosophy — February 21, 2007 @ 11:21 am