The shocking webpage?

Feel free to visit my webpage if you want to learn more about me.

Please note that using a direct link for the podcast on the webpage forced the user to download it. I didn't care for that so i created a page just for the podcast to give it almost the same feel as the video.

Also it may not be the best idea for that link to my webpage to be on here, since this blog gives no indication as to who i am, . . . except for the video credits, . . . so nevermind.

And I now hate both iMovie and iWeb. iDVD may be next. I'll keep you posted.

Shocking VLOG!!!!

The LEGO Trooper: Episode IX


Creating the Video: Afterthoughts

While I still think I sound horrible, the sound itself is horrible as well. I will say that there are much faster and easier ways to make a Vlog other than the way I went about it. I wish i had chosen one at this point. I do like the video, just not the sound. Anyway, I made the video by using still photos of a LEGO stormtrooper with various head movements and some arm movements and plug them into After Effects to make the animation of L.T.. I then just ran an Xbox through my DVD-Recorder and recorded as I played the game. I then used HandBrake to get the scenes from the DVD. Due to time constraints and my own stupidity I found myself without a decent audio record and had to use the mic on my computer to record the audio. I put everything together in iMovie (not the greatest when audio is involved) and created the video. If I had a lot of time on my hands I wouldn't mind doing more episodes, but unfortunately I do not. I do believe that videos like this and those of the more normal variety are going to by seen quite a lot and probably more than they are now in the future, so maybe some day a special edition of this episode will be made or even more LEGO Trooper episodes (but those probably won't be as good).

Here is a shot of the set.
And
here are some videos that makes mine seem very insignificant.
video1 and video2

A Presidential (hopeful) Blog - (Shocking if it was 7 years ago, maybe even 3)

Today I decided to take a look at Hillary Clinton's blog on her campaign website. It's not shocking that the blog entries aren't posted by her but by Crystal Patterson for most part, but a few of the ones I looked at were entirely direct quotes from her. Others from time to time were written by other people about specific things. There is a seperate page for videos or "HillCasts" as they call it if you don't want to search through all the posts to find one. Though, as i'm writing this they just added another post that is a video (through YouTube) about how you can vote for what her campaign song should be.

They do seem to be using the blog to it's full potential. They sometimes have several posts a day and have the ability for viewers to subscribe to it through several methods. And with the use of other writers adding content from time to time they give the readers more variety in what they are reading then just the same updates everyday (Not that that's bad thing). I believe the readers of this blog are the audiendce they are attempting to reach mostly because of the comments posted and that there atre links to her facebook and myspace pages that would be aimed more at different audiences.

I believe that this blog was created because the canidate is doing what is expected of her with her news releases. It would seem wrong for her nopt to have a blog or any of the canidates for that matter, but especially her because she gets so much attention.

The blog itself seems more of a way for those already behind her to keep up with her though. For those who are unsure or curious it can be helpful but other places on the site would be better suited to get them behind her. As for myself I would have to say that it has improved my opion of her a little, but I was already leaning her direction anyway, so it wasn't a very big effect.

YouTube, YAY!!!! - (Hmmm, shocking ... isn't it?)

YouTube is definitely the first place I think about if I want to find a video of something on the web. I go there pretty frequently to look for videos i want to see and then stay and look around at other videos while I'm there. And most of the time when i look for something, the thing I'm looking for is copyrighted and then I stay to look at the "uncopyrighted" ones. Though that seems a strange answer, because aren't all the videos on there copyrighted in someway by the poster. The issue is if they were copyrighted by someone besides the poster. Anyway, I definitely believe that the copyrighted videos should be on there, because they draw the crowd who then stays to look at everything else. Plus, let's say that a clip from show appears on YouTube, and people go to YouTube to see the clip. The clip is part of a show and people may want to watch more because of the clip they watched. For example, I watch Robot Chicken all the time now, because I went on YouTube and watched the clip of the Emperor getting a collect call from Darth Vader. YouTube helps the owner of the copyrighted videos in that way.

I believe that the DMCA is a very good thing for providers and users on the web. And i think that t should protect YouTube because if itself and it's users weren't granted the freedom that the DMCA provides then YouTube would fail and so would many other sites out there. It's because of the user's video postings that they are allowed to make money. They don't post the videos themsleves. They're still just a host for user content and the DMCA allows for them not to have to check every file that being posted on their site. If they advertise that they are a source of entertainment, they are only that source because of their users and what those users. YouTube should be allowed to continue as a provider to users for them to post their videos and with the DMCA's protection.

This post was based on the recent column written by a writer who is general counsel for Viacom.

Shocking Podcast!!!!!!

PODCAST: Episode I
(Meaning its pretty bad)




Creating the Podcast: Afterthoughts

While I believe I sound horrible I think the experience was good. I'd be more than happy to make another as long as I wasn't speaking in it. As far as this podcast goes I interviewed myself using a Digital Audio Recorder, though I would have rather used something I own, since there were a few things I wanted to change or add after I returned the recorder. I interviewed myself, by setting up the recorder in front of a speaker phone and called it with my cell phone and then left the room. I recorded the questions regularly afterward. I then edited everything in Garageband and pulled music from Cowboy Bebop and images via Google: images. It wasn't that hard to edit. I didn't have any difficulties with Garageband and thought they had it setup pretty well to create one. Posting was pretty easy but i'm used top that kind of stuff so I might be bias.
I think that the use of podcasts work really well as an alternative to reading text on a webpage. You can add images to make the listener stay interested, or no images allow for the listener to do other things while listening. I believe it's a very good medium to be used on the internet or your favorite mp3 player (iPod).

Industry Post #3 - Ethics and Representation - (not shocking)

The ethical challenges that can come from blogs for media to consider would be that while blogs can contain facts and helpful information, can what's being said be trusted? Now this isn't the trust issues you might have about news networks, but issues that the information could be completely made up or solely based on opinion. The issue is whether or not to believe what's being posted as fact and then pass that information on saying so. And if a news agency does this the legal consequences that might arise if the info is false.
So when it comes to the matter of putting your information on the internet and what other people may be able to take from it I'm guarded with the things I post. Facebook and myspace do add to this problem in a way by allowing others to see what you post and form opinions about it. But that's where the nice privacy settings come into place. However those settings are restricting the exposure you could get. So if you want more exposure to what your blogging then you have to allow the opinions that might be formed about you. That's the price of putting your thoughts out there. Anyone can interpret them the way they want.
The reader has all the power. The reader must decide whether they can trust the source when they are reading it, when they are commenting on it, or when they are refering to it in their own blog. For regulated media the ethical problem is if their source for information is reliable and if they should pass along that information as being fact.

Industry #2 - (is it shocking that i think this way?)

Hmmmm, this article could generate a lot of opinion based on the laws we have for media and those for free speech, at least in this country. Suing someone because of what they wrote in a blog seems as reasonable to me as any other case of this kind in other media. Although certain factors should be involved. The blogger and the users who comment on the blog should be held accountable for what they post depending on its content as to if it's fact or opinion. Again as someone would be in any other form of media. A blogger's credibility is up to the reader to decide. A blog can be written by anyone about anything and whether or not we believe what's written to be true is up to the us. People question the information they get from other media based on where it comes from, so they should be able to do the same here. If the blogger's content or the user comments are targeted, I believe the ISPs should act towards the personal information of their users the way a journalist would act with their sources and the same laws should apply. Bloggers and users, like sources, would most likely say things differently or not at all if they didn't have a degree of anonymity. Protections should be provided to users and the only regulating that should be involved is that which users define for themselves. There are exceptions (that I agree with) like those applied to mature content and such. Any user on the internet should be able to judge for themselves what they believe to be credible and what they think is acceptable. And if any of them have a problem with that they can post their comments and say so.

That may be a bit contradictory, but this isn't the easiest subject to agree on one way or the other.