What is Digg?97 Comments
- Lorian, on 10/12/2007, -10/+61Real or Windows Media... Why, why does everyone insist on using crappy video formats?
Anyway, cool concept, got kinda boring after a while though. - idonthack, on 10/12/2007, -11/+51"Windows Media is a good format."
Quoted for hilarity. - carguy84, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28Ha, I spotted a storm trooper mask!
- ubermayo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19Yeah that would be kinda intense... its like a $1 a picture... so... $2500 bucks? wow. you could almost get yourself a brand new blue hippo computer!
- computerdude33, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Mac users can use Windows Media & Real- it's just that those formats are terrible.
- Metal_Guru, on 10/12/2007, -6/+21I agree. WMV is a horrible format, with Real only slightly better in quality. 'bout time we start seeing some change in the way we view online media.
But hey, you don't rate anyone down for saying WMV is good. Everyone's free to express opinion. He didn't flame. This is our chance of sitting down and talking to him to rid him of this illusion he is suffering of. :) - vpla, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20Good thing we aren't asking you then :)
- awfulshot, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14http://youtube.com/watch?v=GUMZUVvlTUQ&search=smashing%20pumpkins%20thirty%20three
smashing pumpkins did it a few years ago - etruscan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12I'm not trying to be accusational, but I have feelings of doubt that this was actually done with 2500 polaroids instead of a series of matted video stills. Regardless of the validity of the technique though - it's well done, looks nice, and the song isn't bad... so I think it's worth a digg.
- kaniz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Dont like the song too much, but neat idea for a video.
- twisterX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10^ Yea it could be a poloriod frame with just a bunch of digitals displayed in it.
Who would waste all the money in those films. - Opelious, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It definitly was, and you can tell by two things.
1) A polaroid wouldn't look that flat. It would be much shinier/glossy than that, let alone that it looks pasted in.
2) When it goes into the pictures, and the camera moves around. First time it did that, it completely broke the illusion, because the speed was still really quick like the photos.
Either way, pretty cool. - ai42, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8You obviously have never seen music video budgets. Check out Sarah McLachlan's World on Fire video it will give you an idea of what kind of cost is involved.
- datagod, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8ACH! FEH! I think I had a seizure from all the flickering movements of the "hand" placing the photos...
Seriously needs better editing... - DigitAl56K, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Yep!
DivX Web Player. DVD-quality video in your browser. Like.. hello people...
http://labs.divx.com/archives/000072.html
:) - computerdude33, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Hmm. Nope, last I checked, every one of my Windows friends had QT installed on their computers.
- Leoniceno, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Couldn't it have been done with a bunch of blank pieces of paper and a video editor?
- illu45, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Not sure if it was actually made using polaroid stills, but nonetheless, a very nice video. I like the "movement" portions (where it goes through hallways and whatnot), although the bits with the hand flickering in and out started getting annoying after a while, to me, at least.
- Skeuomorph, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6There's a lot of misinformation in the one-sided "format war" in this thread.
First, ".avi" is not a format. It's a type of media container file, and the media inside it may be encoded in a variety of codecs (compression/decompression algorithms), such as HuffYUV, Indeo, DiVX, or even a proprietary DVCAM or MPEG2 codec. When you express a preference for AVI, you're most likely not talking about the codec used for video quality, you're talking about the portability of AVI across readily available tools.
Second, "Real", "Windows Media", and QuickTime are not formats, they're platforms for media delivery. Each of these platforms can deliver a variety of codecs inside their media containers. For example, Windows Media platform can deliver .mp3 audio files. Each platform can offer high quality encoding in an very portable container, quality high enough and similar enough that to see differences in properly encoded video, frames have to be freeze-framed and enlarged. The choice of whether to offer high quality is up to the content owner who produces the original encoding.
The comments here that somebody else's format "sucks" also illustrate a misunderstanding of codecs versus delivery methods. For example, if what's being called a "Real" stream buffers while a DiVX file doesn't, that's not because of a format problem, that's because the web site you're getting the file from is "streaming" the first file but letting you download the second file, and the streaming site doesn't have enough bandwidth to let you watch in real time. Even HTTP delivery of a cross platform codec in Flash is no guarantee, as anyone knows who has waited 30 mins for a 3 minute video via Google or YouTube.
Within a given format, such as DiVX, a content owner's decisions at encoding time dramatically affect video quality. With several dozen quality and compression parameters to tweak, not to mention dozens of algorithms implementing variations on what (at the heart) are very similar MPEG4-derived routines, encoding quality is somewhat of a crap shoot. But again, this is not related to the 4-letter codec code on the file, but decisions made at encoding time.
Finally, try not to confuse DRM methods with file containers and video codecs. Content owners (movie studios, record labels) demand protections for digital media, and major operating system makers try to produce products their markets request. Microsoft naturally refined their DRM to work with the Windows Media platform, and Apple naturally refined Fairplay to work with QuickTime and in particular, AAC audio files. But this thread's favorite codecs are under siege too, from "Open DRM" solutions backed by international giants such as Nokia and Samsung. These solutions readily "DRM protect" most open source video, audio, and image types.
Long story short, if you're trashing QuickTime's quality, take a moment to specify which version of video codec you object to, or whether you're objecting to the platform, or if its the fair-use restrictions that bother you. Is the objectionable content encoded in Sorensen V3 or MPEG4-AVC? When you say Windows Media sucks, are you referring to a stream, or a download? Is the file using an old WM8 video codec based on MPEG4, or a newer WM9 video codec leveraging manual MPEG4-AVC settings? Was it encoded by an encoding factory that treats every file the same way, or was it encoded with the same video by video care you take when you transcode your DVD collection?
And for what it's worth, whichever codec you didn't like in this discussion, you're right. We live in an analog world of smooth curves and fractal edges. Until popular video codecs stop trying to represent the world with big square blocks, all video codecs will suck. - Fishy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8"This is cooler than the pumpkins video imho." - Herd
Too bad the Pumpkins one actually used real film ;) - bking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Agreed. It's a good effect, but it gets old. The whole point of an effect like this is to appreciate it without questioning it. The HP picture frame ads and the Rolling Stone's "Like a Rolling Stone" are prime examples of this. The effect does not get old, and you don't find yourself picking it apart beyond "omfg.. how did they do it?"
This was a good concept, but they couldn't make it entertaining through the entire song. - ai42, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6http://www.worldonfire.ca/
That is the video for referance - Tobey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Oh yay, we're saved. There's also Windows Media links...
I need Quick Time damnit! - Sixcolors, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"The only people who use Quicktime are the people with Mac's since they can't use anything else."
Wow, I thought people who thought like that were extinct. But since your knowledge is out of date, let me enlighten.
Both Win Media and Real players are available for Mac OS and they have been for years (since OS 8 - possibly 7, but I don't remember back that far). It's my opinion that both .wmv and .rm are lousy formats, even on Windows. Chosen for the DRM and nothing else. I'd much prefer an MPEG. - Tobey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yes. And I've done it before. Except I printed a green square where the picture should be, for easy keying.
- briguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Cool video, but clearly it was videotaped and then made to look like polaroid videos. Like the music too.
- Sixcolors, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The biggest problem with streaming media in Win Media for Mac? One word: "Buffering"......................
- eyestosky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Right when I saw the title, I was thinking the same thing -- the Smashing Pumpkins did this 10 years ago with 33 (well not with polaroids but the same concept with 35mm camera)
...and (in my opinion) the pumpkins video is much better and so is the song.
I mean this is just some girl walking around the Pumpkins video is a visual interpretation of every line in the song (much cooler). It's actually my favourite Pumpkins video. Too bad the youtube video is really low quality. - denied, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Meh, my hackintosh doesn't like the .asx, and real player? euuugh, i'll just pass on a video entirely before I ever install Real.
- wtfdan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4There's no way it's done with polaroid film. The images are either printed or super-imposed onto the papers that the hand is laying down.
Neat result, though. - ThomasCS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Update: Having read through the message board, it does in fact seem that it is really polaroids. It was apparently's Sia's idea because the only medium on which she thinks she looks good is polaroid.
Mystery solved. - buss, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I thought I saw one or two as well. Good to know i'm not crazy!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4what did the rolling stone do with like a rolling stone?
Didn't see that.
But also, I can't get this because I don't have WMP or REAL.
Quicktime, anyone? - Lorian, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I'm not a Mac user, I use Windows (games...), they just suck. All my videos are XviD encoded AVI. Much easier to work with.
- ThomasCS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The song itself is quite old (early 2004), but it's a nice take on quite a good song.
Hard to say whether it's really polaroids, but you could always ask her yourself (yes, she answers questions on her message board):
http://www.siamusic.net/message/
Sia is doing well for herself for a girl from Adelaide, but then as I understand it she's got a pretty good pedigree - I think Colin Hay of "Men At Work" (and excellent solo work featured on Scrubs etc) fame is her uncle. - Ignignokt01, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4If so, then it still deserves recognition, because they pulled it off mighty well. Not my personal musical preference, but like Kaniz said, twas a 'neat idea'.
EDIT: haha just saw the ending, it was ridiculous. She's like supposed to be running but she looks like she's on some heavy drugs because her emotions changed with every photo. - kindrobot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Wow. Cool video. In the best possible use of the word cool.
- antdude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Also on http://videos.antville.org/stories/1197538/ ...
- mugget, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2are kilodelta and I the only people that saw that this was old news?
I remember seeing this way back in last year, it is a pretty neat idea. but what the hell is it doing on the front page now? i'm not digging this... - mattjb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Personally I like how Sam Bisbee's music video does it:
http://www.sambisbee.com/youarehere/youarehere.html - swhite1987, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Video's been playing on MtvU for quite a while... I remember the first time I saw it thinking "cool idea," then wondering if it was actually made with real polaroids. IIRC there is another "easter egg" (pun intended) in the video but I forget where it is.
- iamsam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Interesting concept but a rather dull song and overall an okay music video.
- Snyder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'ma big fan of Zero 7, and of course Sia, so you can imagine how deep the ending of Six Feet Under, my favorite show, hit me when this song, my favorite by Sia, came in. I had truly never been so moved.
- kilodelta, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3blogpost from October 2005....old.
- Anoobis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I think the pumpkins song is better and the way they interpret each line of the song but to see each polaroid in this new one is pretty cool
- xswag, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Do a search on YouTube for the same video if you have probs with these file types.
- ub3rgeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2here is the video in the itunes music store if anyones intrested
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewVideo?id=117428278&s=143441 - IVIrMP3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I agree. Yelena Yemchuk did that video with the 35mm camera 10 years ago. The still frame quality is lost on YouTube. Both are great songs.
I'm on season 3 of Six Feet Under, This song is supposed to be the last song of the Last Episode. It will be good to see the song in context. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i got really sick trying to watch the video
- zero_pc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There use to be a printer that uses polaroid films, I use to have one. It looks like they got certain frames and had it printed on a polariod.
http://froogle.google.com/froogle_cluster?q=polaroid+film+printer&pid=2251647943811161052&oid=2418545381780897934&btnG=Search+Froogle&scoring=mrd&hl=en
These printers are kinda cool. -
Show 51 - 97 of 97 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is