Mobile video has gone nowhere

Apr 25, 2008 at 12:40 AM
4 comments

Recently, filmmaker Spike Lee announced a partnership with Nokia to make www.nokiaproductions.com.
The site wants users to upload mobile created films and Mr Lee will pick the best ones to assemble a larger film. This reminded me of a project from 2 years ago.

Nokia N93 TVad

1 comment

This video commercial starring Gary Oldman was made two years ago when the Nokia N93 was announced. Since then, Nokia has released the N93i, N95, E90, N82 and N96. All of them capable of the same 640x480 VGA video.

But its 2008. Only the N96 is poised to be the big fish.in mobile video for this year, yet it will still be technically inferior to the N93/N93i since it will have mono recording. Check out this audio comparison, the N93/N93i are still the kings of mobile video.

I guess we wont see anything amazing until 2009. What a bummer 2008 will be.

4 comments

Tags:

This also appears in:

Comments

Admittedly you are right. But as counter arguments I have two. 1 The N93i is still for sale with optical zoom and stereo. But for most of us video are the raisons in the cake. And a jummy cake it is. I only make occasional video recordings and the audio and video quality of the N95 series is mostly sufficient for me.

If I am informed correctly. The latest chipsets for mobile HD video are only recently released so at most eind of 2008/mid 2009 you can expect mobile phones with HD video. But how many will buy them?

[this is good]

Agreed! 2008 is turning into a bit of a turkey.

In August it will be 2 years since the N93 debuted - two years!! And it's still the best video capture device Nokia currently offer. I find it hard to believe that Nokia have abandoned video capture, I think they have something big planned for the end of this year. Perhaps not HD, but certainly 16:9, with optical zoom and stereo sound capture.

Another great post - keep em coming!

[this is good]

I had a kind of epiphany this last weekend.

I was looking at some footage that I shot with the Canon HV10 (amazing camera that still stuns me to this day). It was some random footage of a squirrel eating a nut, friends, family and general sights and sounds of my home town.

I edited the 25 minutes worth of source video down to about 3 minutes, the whole process took about 10 minutes, the exporting to H.264 at 720p took about a further 10 minutes - the end results was really quite special and much more satisfying to me than flicking through a bunch of photos.

I wonder how many more people would give video serious consideration if they realised just how gorgeous it can look on their home TV and just how easy it is to edit these days?

Two things have been holding back home video these last 25 years...

Editing. Nobody wants to sit through 2 hours of boring holiday video, but a 20 minutes (best of) version might actually be quite enjoyable. Video editing for the masses is only now beginning to become a reality.

Quality. You can't beat a still photograph for sharpness and colour accuracy, right? Well, with the latest HD camcorders each individual frame is almost as good (when displayed on screen) as a still photograph.

I'm seriously considering a self-imposed ban on still photography for the rest of the year - that way I can compare my (mostly) still photographic record of January to May to an all video photographic account of June to December. I can then decide which one to focus on during 2009 - with or without a Nokia HD capable N99! (^_-)

snoyt replied to The Creative Life’s comment:
Apr 25, 2008
Reply

I have always found that Canon really knows how make a camera that makes spectacular shots. In contrast to you I prefere pictures above movies. I like to capture the moment, that one great angle of viewing. Video seems more about action and people interacting (which explains that a little red glowing record light on your device makes most people very nervous). Also there are less details to see in video.

Editing: I do it on my N95 when needed.
Quality: Terrific, looks great on my PC and even better on a TV

I think video is for recording 'processes'. Like walking, bycyling, looking out the window of a train, record people dancing. Animals eating, playing or what ever. Photo's are for moments is for someone sitting on a bench, a mountainview, a quiet road and those unique single views that stirrs the heart for the composition. Little interest one would find in a 10 minute long recording of a standing tree. But a picture can make it special. Now were this tree in the process of being cut down, I'd say make a video...

Then again if you could record RAW topquality HD-video, each frame would be a picture.

Mobile video has gone nowhere

Comments

Post a comment

About Me

My Links

My Groups

Neighborhood

Tags

Archives