4 ms·

me being stupid but I actually thought flickr for video would fail because video takes more work than photos to create and because it takes more time to view th

me being stupid but I actually thought flickr for video would fail because video takes more work than photos to create and because it takes more time to view them. clearly I was wrong

rhizome 7y ago
The part that gets me with video is the upload time. Do people just have faster connections than me, or is the secret to create a phone app that restricts the files to greatly reduced resolutions? Seems like flickr for video would require greater bandwidth or time requirements, but I might simply be clueless.
- jlokier 7y ago
  Mobile data has been fast enough for many years now, depending where you live. My 2 year old phone has 20Mbit/s upload and 79Mbit/s download on a good day. I don't upload videos, but if I did I expect that's fast enough in the background. The phone upload is way faster than my "fiber" connection at home was, when I still had one.
  - rhizome 7y ago
    I think common speeds are enough for 15-120sec of video up to pretty large resolutions, but for 30min or more? YouTube commonly has multi-hour videos, do people just let their uploads run for a week or three? Families especially would probably not appreciate Dad filling the upload pipe with last week/s baseball games all the time. It may be obvious at this point that I don't know a lot about the producer side of internet video, and I'm sure there are 15 years worth of tools and techniques out there, but I'd be curious what the tolerances and expectations of users. YT probably pays a lot of money for focus groups to get that data, though.
    - jlokier 7y ago
      At 20Mbit/s upload speed, the upload is 2x faster than real-time at Youtube's recommended encoding settings for 1080P (what was called "Full HD video"), and equal to YT's recommended encoding settings for 1440P. So at that rate, Dad can fill the upload pipe continuously, with 24x7 real-time streaming at 1080P and there will still be half a pipe left over for everyone else. The family might not even notice. However, at some ADSL upload speeds (say 2Mbit/s, which is a bit slow for ADSL in 2019), the upload is considerably slower than real-time. It might take 5 hours to upload a 1 hour video in 1080P. That's tolerable enough for a committed long video producer. I'm sure video producers have been doing multi-hour or overnight uploads for years. They don't need to run for weeks.
      - rhizome 7y ago
        Your "20mbit up" doesn't explain the videos that are already there.
        jlokier 7y ago
        It doesn't, which is why I described ADSL upload rates taking multiple hours to upload a 1 hour video, and people doing it overnight. ADSL upload rates have been reasonably stable for many years. I've seen someone uploading a video like that and getting a bit nervous because they had a deadline, about 5 years ago. That's how I know people did it, but it took hours, not weeks. It would have taken weeks when they were still using 56k modems, before ADSL. But ADSL rolled out before YouTube was founded, so I doubt many people making long videos needed to do that.
nostrademons 7y ago
YouTube's genius was to realize that that was no longer the case. They've said in interviews that a lot of the impetus to create the product was to realize that tools like cell-phone video and iMovie meant that video would rapidly become a lot cheaper to produce, and that meant there'd be a market for video-sharing. Cell-phone video is also what took the average duration of a video down from 60min 8mm cassettes to 2-3min digital clips, which are the perfect size for a webpage view.

me being stupid but I actually thought flickr for video would fail because video takes more work than photos to create and because it takes more time to view them. clearly I was wrong

rhizome 7y ago

The part that gets me with video is the upload time. Do people just have faster connections than me, or is the secret to create a phone app that restricts the files to greatly reduced resolutions? Seems like flickr for video would require greater bandwidth or time requirements, but I might simply be clueless.

jlokier 7y ago
Mobile data has been fast enough for many years now, depending where you live. My 2 year old phone has 20Mbit/s upload and 79Mbit/s download on a good day. I don't upload videos, but if I did I expect that's fast enough in the background. The phone upload is way faster than my "fiber" connection at home was, when I still had one.
- rhizome 7y ago
  I think common speeds are enough for 15-120sec of video up to pretty large resolutions, but for 30min or more? YouTube commonly has multi-hour videos, do people just let their uploads run for a week or three? Families especially would probably not appreciate Dad filling the upload pipe with last week/s baseball games all the time. It may be obvious at this point that I don't know a lot about the producer side of internet video, and I'm sure there are 15 years worth of tools and techniques out there, but I'd be curious what the tolerances and expectations of users. YT probably pays a lot of money for focus groups to get that data, though.
  - jlokier 7y ago
    At 20Mbit/s upload speed, the upload is 2x faster than real-time at Youtube's recommended encoding settings for 1080P (what was called "Full HD video"), and equal to YT's recommended encoding settings for 1440P. So at that rate, Dad can fill the upload pipe continuously, with 24x7 real-time streaming at 1080P and there will still be half a pipe left over for everyone else. The family might not even notice. However, at some ADSL upload speeds (say 2Mbit/s, which is a bit slow for ADSL in 2019), the upload is considerably slower than real-time. It might take 5 hours to upload a 1 hour video in 1080P. That's tolerable enough for a committed long video producer. I'm sure video producers have been doing multi-hour or overnight uploads for years. They don't need to run for weeks.
    - rhizome 7y ago
      Your "20mbit up" doesn't explain the videos that are already there.
      - jlokier 7y ago
        It doesn't, which is why I described ADSL upload rates taking multiple hours to upload a 1 hour video, and people doing it overnight. ADSL upload rates have been reasonably stable for many years. I've seen someone uploading a video like that and getting a bit nervous because they had a deadline, about 5 years ago. That's how I know people did it, but it took hours, not weeks. It would have taken weeks when they were still using 56k modems, before ADSL. But ADSL rolled out before YouTube was founded, so I doubt many people making long videos needed to do that.

nostrademons 7y ago

YouTube's genius was to realize that that was no longer the case. They've said in interviews that a lot of the impetus to create the product was to realize that tools like cell-phone video and iMovie meant that video would rapidly become a lot cheaper to produce, and that meant there'd be a market for video-sharing. Cell-phone video is also what took the average duration of a video down from 60min 8mm cassettes to 2-3min digital clips, which are the perfect size for a webpage view.