Comments on: YouTube's $350 Million Original Content Venture Will Renew Only 40% of Channels

By: YouTube is on Your Actual Tube, and Your Android Device is the Controller - NoFilmSchool

Fri, 04 Jan 2013 03:49:48 +0000

[...] make itself a media service platform that rivals the traditional television you’re used to. Original channels are getting a major push, creators are being given some big perks as incentive, and shooting/uploading elegance now trumps [...]

By: Original Comedies Coming from Amazon Studios: Your Feedback Decides Which Pilots Are Greenlit - NoFilmSchool

Sat, 22 Dec 2012 18:01:13 +0000

[...] clear that industry leaders in web-based media are taking original content very seriously — Even Netflix, traditionally a home to separately created content, has rolled up its sleeves [...]

By: Ewa Pazera » YouTube Space Brings a Studio, Workshops, and a Collaborative Environment to Creators, for Free

Sun, 02 Dec 2012 03:07:10 +0000

[...] content creators and partners — the biggest of which (of all time, in fact) saw YouTube spending a third of a billion dollarson original channels and accompanying marketing. Amazingly, YouTube doesn’t seem satisfied to [...]

By: Attention-Deficit Audiences and How New Media Might Be Affecting Traditional Filmmaking - NoFilmSchool

Wed, 28 Nov 2012 16:43:04 +0000

[...] a side-note, it’s interesting that YouTube itself is attempting to expand the very parameters that Mike’s mentioning here, because as he says, everything has its audience and the trick is [...]

By: Daniel Mimura

Daniel Mimura — Thu, 22 Nov 2012 04:31:42 +0000

I think the first step, if they want to be taken “seriously”…is redoing the interface, both for function as well aesthetics.

I hate having to deal with their interface, as well as either having to log in, or constantly having to reset the video to higher rez every time. It’s always resetting.

And the damned ads and pop ups…from both them and the way they allow content creators to do it…it’s like a video game—I have to zap the pop ups without clicking the wrong thing and restarting or pausing the video as fast as I can.

For those reasons and more, I can’t take youtube in any variety seriously.

By: Dan

Dan — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 17:29:55 +0000

I still don’t see how quality video can be delivered on today’s internet infrastructure. They can’t even recreate 720p content correctly, let alone 4k. It’s compressed all to hell and the ISP’s like Comcast put artificial monthly caps on the amount of downloadable content and bandwidth usage, which stifles the use of the internet for streaming quality video content in the first place. Quality takes a lot of data!

By: David

David — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 23:58:57 +0000

I find myself constantly punk’d by YouTube search and it is driven by Google’s sophisticated search algorithms. My problem is the key words used to index the content are pretty much useless when anyone can use the same words to define their content. So most of the jewels are buried very far underground and have to be mined by other people and blogged or otherwise brought to my attention for me to view them. That said, I do browse quite a bit for hidden gems until my patience is exhausted. And not once have I spent time viewing a channel. Video search based on face recognition in the video frame is still sci-fi and Google’s YouTube remains terribly disorganized. If you don’t know the artist or content generator’s name, how can you view her content? If the artist is famous, how many spoofs and knock-offs will the site host?

By: James

James — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 20:43:13 +0000

I think the cat video jokes are part of the problem with people’s conception of Youtube, there’s a ton of great stuff on there, but unfortunately Google has unparalleled engineering chops with questionable marketing strategies. There’s nothing truly terrible in this news, actually encouraging that they’re plugging forward, everyone knows there was no chance of the initial slate being 100% successful but I do agree with the comments that there might have to be some sort of walling off of “premium” content to bring it into focus. Nobody I know who isn’t into filmmaking has even heard of these channels so as I believe has been said on this site again, the challenge today for artists isn’t about getting your work produced or released. It’s getting people to actually watch it. I think it should be noted that this article didn’t mention it but Google didn’t base their decisions strictly on page views, but rather how long people actually watched the videos.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 18:59:28 +0000

Thadon’s got a point, in a way. 99% of what’s there sucks donkey balls, whether it’s at a film festival, on a network, or original content on YouTube.

By: thadon calico

thadon calico — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 07:20:29 +0000

to filmmakers constantly in their little bubble, the “well-produced, well-written” content that adheres to all the restrictions and confines of what defines a good image / film, may appeal to the film community…but entertainment is not solely about your art form hence youtube is not “FILM-MAKER-TUBE” and in such a democratic environment like youtube, we see that the forced conventions of filmmaking does not hold up with simple and genuine cat coughing videos (i am yet to see a cat cough) …its great to see videos that challenge the archaic art form that i belong to called film making with rigid composition and writing structures…..the reason “reality shows” r becoming more popular on tv and kicking out the fictional series is that most peeps can relate to that “realness” more than they can with the contrived shit my fellow filmmakers constantly put up be it on the big screen or vimeo….its all the same shit kinda like music industry….the music industry is a pointer for the film industry and the jig is up, visual entertainment is not limited to fiction, but a cat doing silly / cute things is more entertaining than your most of my fellow filmmakers contrived art form.

THIS IS MORE INTRIGUING THAN MAJORITY OF THE INDIE FILM FESTIVAL CONTENT http://youtu.be/SKRgktzRvZ0 WITHOUT THE FANCY CAMERA WORK / PIXEL PEEPING (fucking pixel peeping digi-”Toms”)

my dear filmmakers, our industry needs to be revamped or its going down the drain like the music industry, it lies in our youth not the adults or legends, they typically know it all “experience is the blah blah blah” they’ll be gone tomorrow, we have to merge platforms and create the new standards

By: Ben Howling

Ben Howling — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 04:48:43 +0000

with Justin Bieber dressed in a cat-suit, playing piano?

By: Swested

Swested — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 04:32:49 +0000

No matter how well-produced, well-written, well-funded or well-cast this premium content may be, the top video on any given day is either a Justin Bieber music video or a kitten playing piano. How can anyone beat that?

By: Austin Mace

Austin Mace — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 01:01:13 +0000

That’s exactly what they’ve done with Phillip DeFranco through Source Fed http://sourcefednews.com/

By: Asdf

Asdf — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 01:00:42 +0000

The alleged “premium” content was just plain shite. It just goes to show that marketing is no replacement for entertainment value.
Trying to make youtube more about premium content would kill it stone dead.
Bizarre as it may seem, people like the yogscast – who easily get 1 million views in a day – are the future for youtube.

By: Ben Howling

Ben Howling — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:14:41 +0000

If I were YouTube, and I were seriously exploring this avenue, then I’d set up a production company to make some legit content (drama/reality/lifestyle – aka “premium content”) in all the major market places on all the major networks to start to make people associate the YouTube brand with legit broadcast content as well as cat videos.

Essentially, it’s just a case of taking this premium content that they’re already paying for, and playing it to the masses through traditional means, with a tease of BTS or part 2 available online.

By: N.K.Osborne

N.K.Osborne — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:59:16 +0000

I kinda agree with the above comments. However, I don’t think it takes a new site for this to work. It’s pretty simple really. Change the home page. At the moment it’s just your subscriptions and recommendations. I feel the home page can work to show premium content and your subscriptions. Hulu has a layout that does this (showing the most popular shows etc.) Netflix on my PS3 had a big banner of a Netflix original show then under it was my instant queue. I clicked on the show because it caught my eye.

I think it’s just about bringing awareness to the premium stuff. If it was a separate site they’ll be tossing away their audience. People go to youtube so now make it so when they go there they see the stuff they expect (subs videos) but also high quality premium videos.

I also suspect some users will be willing to let ads for the premium stuff to play before their videos if you make it worth their while.

By: James0b57

James0b57 — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:28:43 +0000

Youtube should remain for the common user…. hence “you” tube. And the premium content should get a newer-better-shinier branding.

By: Gary Allen

Gary Allen — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:16:47 +0000

I agree with Luke… To an average user, finding the premium content might be difficult. Most of the time people have sift through a lot of the junk to get good stuff.

By: Luke Neumann

Luke Neumann — Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:00:50 +0000

Yes! I think this model, in some form, is the future of entertainment. It’s a good start but YouTube needs to do a better job of marketing this “premium” content. I’m talking about something drastic too, like moving all non premium stuff away from the “YouTube” url and having that site be home to the premium stuff. I’m not web savvy, so maybe that’s not even possible, but it’s going to take something along those lines to set up a clear line between what’s premium content and what is YouTube.