Done21

This Tuesday, March 2nd, 2010, we’re bringing you exclusive behind the scenes footage of FOWA Miami 2010. Tune in for interviews from Gary Vaynerchuk, John Resig, Alex Hunter, Steve Huffman, and more!

Check out the teaser video below:

When Jim and I first discussed creating a video show, we decided that we didn’t want to do it unless it was fresh; Something people hadn’t seen before. I was reminded of this during a WordCamp Miami session when Angie Moncada said that you have to find what makes you different.

The question we had to ask ourselves was, “What makes us different?” - What can we offer that nobody else is doing right now? With online video in its infancy, there’s still a huge possibility space. There’s no predefined show formats and there’s very few expectations.

When we were trying to find a differentiator, we looked at a lot of different screencasts, vid shows, pod blogs, or whatever they call them these days. After checking out lots and lots of tutorial-style videos, we noticed some common characteristics. Just to name a few:

• People very rarely show their face and choose instead to only their computer screens.
• There’s too much rambling about unimportant details and not enough information.
• Most videos put more focus on the video, rather than the audio.

We started finding differentiators by doing the exact opposite of these observations. In Doctype, we show screens and our faces to make the show feel human. We write scripts before we start recording so that we stick to what matters. And lastly, we spend time making the audio just as intelligible as the video. These aren’t new ideas (in fact they’re older than the Internet). They’re just different ways of approaching the medium and subject matter as it exists today.

It’s hard to make the time to find a differentiator. And you shouldn’t do something differently just to be different. However, you should always question the status quo when creating something new. Chances are, there’s already something special about your idea. You just need to figure out what that is.

Every year, a video is put together for BarCamp Orlando. Because we’ve been putting together Doctype for a few months now, we were asked if we would want to create the BarCamp vid. Of course we said yes.

Check out the video, and be sure to visit the official site of BarCamp Orlando to get your ticket. Hope to see you April 3rd!

P.S. They’re still looking for sponsors too.

A lot of people have been asking us about our process for our show Doctype. Here it is, in a nutshell:

Preproduction (about 4 hours)
We start by writing a script in Google Docs. We also use Google Docs for production spreadsheets (keeping track of takes, making notes, etc). Nothing fancy here. We script episodes so that they stay short and to the point (this cuts down on “uhs” and “ums” as well). Occasionally we’ll say exactly what’s written, but most of the time we just use it as a guideline, and we’ll riff on our own. The banter at the beginning is just made up on the spot.

Production (about 2 hours)

1. Record audio into Pro Tools using an Mbox2. This allows us to use phantom powered condenser microphones.
2. Record video using two Canon Vixia HG20 cameras at 24mbps, 24fps@1080p.

For lighting, we use 3 tungsten lamps (plus a florescent light behind us to cut down on shadows). It’s about 2,000 watts total.

Postproduction (about 15 hours)

1. Capture all the good takes into Final Cut Pro (FCP).
2. Back up all the raw video and audio to 2 redundant 7200RPM 1.5 TB HDDs. For this, we use an eSata II ExpressCard, which provides transfer rates of about 3Gbps.
3. Put all the video onto the timeline in FCP and export the audio.
4. Run noise reduction on all voice tracks using Amadeus Pro (a cheaper app than equivalent Pro Tools plugins).
5. Run compression and parametric equalization on all voice tracks.
6. Sync audio to picture in Pro Tools, using the audio file exported from FCP (this is tedious, but camera audio on consumer camcorders is almost always bad and timecode systems are overkill for our needs).
7. Bounce audio from Pro Tools to disc and import into FCP.
8. Export the FCP sequence to Color (the Apple app) and color grade the episode.
9. Trim the edit, add in fades and transitions, lower thirds, and intro (all the motion graphics were created by us, in Motion, another Apple app).
10. Add episode specific graphics, like screencasts, screenshots, diagrams, lists, etc.
11. Add any music or sound FX, while staying conscious of audio levels and the overall saturation of the audio spectrum.
12. Back up everything again to the 2 hard drives.

Distribution (about 3 hours)

1. Export to MPEG-4 H.264 at 720p. (1 hour)
2. Upload to Viddler (because we like their player) and Blip (so that we can host the original files and convert to iPod format for iTunes). (1 hour)
3. Wait for Viddler and Blip to encode the videos. (1 hour)
4. While Viddler and Blip are encoding, write the show notes and episode description.

Wrap up (less than 1 hour)

1. Tweet out the link on @DoctypeTV.
2. Post the link to our Facebook fan page.
3. Ping the Doctype iTunes feed.
4. Back up final export to the 2 drives.

…And that’s what goes into every episode. As you can see, it’s a lot of hard work, but that’s OK because we have tons of fun doing it!

If you have any questions, or if you’re an audio/video expert and can tell us a better way to do things, let us know in the comments.

We’re happy to announce that Doctype is officially a media partner for FOWA Miami 2010. For the uninitiated, Doctype is our show that debuted in September. It’s about web design and web development, and aims to be a great resource for freelancers, engineers, and creative professionals. Check out the latest episode below.

In case you hadn’t heard, we’ve been working on a show called Doctype for several months now. We plan on releasing new episodes every Tuesday on http://doctype.tv. Rather than listening to me drone on, check out our first episode!

If you don’t feel like reading and you already know what sponsored tweets are all about, this clip from The Truman Show sums up my feelings on the matter:

There’s a new frontier of “advertising” and unfortunately, for those of us that cherish real human connections, it’s happening on Twitter. If you haven’t heard, “sponsored tweets” or sponsored conversations or whatever-the-spon you want to call them, have been infesting Twitter like a virus. Only it’s not a virus… People are actually doing this willingly. If you need an example, check out http://ad.ly/ or http://sponsoredtweets.com/ to see what I’m referring to.

I’ll be up front and admit that I haven’t fully investigated the mechanics of it, but as an end user that has felt its impact directly, I think I’ve seen enough to know that this is totally, diabolically evil. For the uninitiated, sponsored tweets are posts made to a Twitter account that are backed by an affiliate marketing program. Now, I have no problem with people using Twitter to promote a product or service. And secondly, I have no problem with content producers monetizing by using advertisements. My problem is that real world connections (people I’ve spoken with face-to-face) are being lured by the promise of cash, and forcing a message via a communication medium in which it makes no sense. Where’s the relevancy? For example, when I was speaking with my pal in California this evening, he didn’t start telling me about how great Soda Drink XYZ is. That would be completely bizarre! And yet, that’s exactly the type of behavior that I’m observing on Twitter.

I get why this is happening, because believe me, I’m extremely guilty of creating many “AdSense Trash Holes” that were purely created for the purposes of getting ad clicks (I don’t do that anymore). Basically, the advertisers are sold on the targeted, “peer recommendation” factor and “virality” of the platform. And publishers probably figure that for all the great content they put out on Twitter, they deserve to use the platform to make a buck or two. There’s a huge disconnect though, and neither party has a complete picture of the problem. When I read my Twitter feed, even though most tweets are sent out to hundreds or thousands of people, they almost feel like one-on-one conversations because they’re a peek into the person’s thoughts. Tell me honestly, does anyone really think about Brand ABC all day?

The medium is the message!

As many of you now know, we’ve been hard at work on a show called “Doctype” for some time. We’re proud to announce that we’ll be releasing our first episode of Doctype on December 1st! If you haven’t seen the teaser trailer over on http://doctype.tv, check it out right here:

Also, be sure to follow Doctype on Twitter and become a fan of Doctype of on Facebook!

At LessConf 2009, we asked Gary Vaynerchuk of Wine Library TV fame why someone should buy his new book, Crush It! and here’s what he had to say…

I’m sure that I’m not the first to comment on this, but here it goes…

We’ve all been carefully observing the ongoing transition between traditional media and the Internet for some time now. With traditional media, the results are very consistent and the production values are very high. For example, you know that your favorite TV show is going to be on every week at the same time and you know that it’s going to be just as great as last week’s episode. Online however, the story is different. Many blogs (this one is an example), podcasts, and video blogs update their content on an unpredictable schedule, and don’t have the same levels of quality as radio and television. This isn’t always the case (Revision3 is one) but as a sweeping generalization, it can be said that traditional media is much more consistent all around than online media. I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with an inconsistent schedule and inconsistent message transmission quality (video quality, writing quality, etc.), and in fact it works great for many people because it gives them a much more human element (Gary Vaynerchuk comes to mind).

What I’m saying is that consistency in content quality, and consistency in the scheduled releases of content, are typically not recognized as the powerful tools that they are.

This is unfortunate, because it means that terms like blog, blogger, podcast, and others have come to be associated with flimsy, easily discredited information or content (not with techies and new media types like us, but the general public). I think more traditional words like show, publication, or journalist more accurately describe the goals of serious content publishers. I totally understand how ridiculous this might sound to a lot of people, and I know this post is seething with hypocrisy. However, I would argue that perception counts a lot, especially when it comes to non-technical individuals that are conditioned to consuming neatly packaged content through traditional channels.

The problems go way beyond the nomenclature, but I strongly believe that great shows (that just happen to be online) have the potential to directly compete with the best television and radio. If we don’t start believing that though, it won’t ever happen.

Go ahead, release the flames. I’m ready.