I believe that with quicktime-pro you can export the videos in
On Jun 3, 2008, at 1:48 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On May 30, 2008, at 9:55 AM, Andreas Schäfer wrote:
>> I've never really dig into Open MPI's guts, not because I wasn't
>> interested, but mainly because the time required to get my bearings
>> seemed just too much. Until now. I've watched a couple of the videos
>> while coding and it was pretty awesome. Easy to understand,
>> and well spoken.
> Good! I'm glad you've found them useful.
>>> - Do you like the format?
>>> - Is the (slides+narration) format useful?
>> Yes, I like it a lot. I guess a pure podcast would be insufficient
>> complex issues where you simply need diagrams.
> That was definitely my thought here -- pictures can be worth a million
> words, etc.
>> Maybe a small
>> suggestion: maybe it's just me, but I'd actually prefer (even) leaner
>> slides. Currently you're basically duplicating on screen what you're
>> saying, which is good when you're a nervous, moumbling college
>> and might lose your audience somewhere. But when you're an experenced
>> speaker (which you obviously are), the audience does rarely need this
>> redundancy and might rather get confused when trying to digest both
>> streams of information (visual and auditory) simultaneously. But this
>> is of course a question of personal preference.
> Thanks for the compliment snuggled in there. :-)
> Yes, this might be a style thing -- I have found that at least some
> people like to have slides that are more-or-less what the speaker
> actually said for two reasons:
> - so that the visuals and audio agree with each other -- it's not two
> different through processes while you're trying to absorb the
> information. Sure, some people read ahead on the slide and get bored
> because the speaker eventually catches up, but at least in my
> experience, these people are a minority.
> - more importantly, however, the audience likes to take the slides
> away and when they actually look at them 6 weeks after the lecture,
> they might actually remember the content better because they received
> the same information via two forms of sensory input (audio + visual).
>>> - Would terminal screen-scrape sessions be useful?
>> I'd prefer how-to pages for this, as you can copy&paste the commands
>> directly into your own shell.
> Good point.
>>> - ...other [low-budget] suggestions?
>> Maybe an a tad higher audio bitrate. And some people don't like the
>> .mov format, but that isn't really important.
> Ok, I can bump up the audio rate and see what happens to the filesize
> (that was my prime concern, actually). Plus it *is* just the builtin
> microphone on my Mac, so it may not be the greatest sound quality to
> begin with. :-)
> As for .mov, yes, this is definitely a compromise. I tried uploading
> the videos to YouTube and Google Video and a few others, but a) most
> have a time or file size restriction (e.g., 10 mins max) -- I was not
> willing to spend the extra work to split up the videos into multiple
> segments, and b) they down-res'ed the videos so much as to make the
> slides look crappy and/or unreadable. So I had to go with the video
> encoder that I could get for darn little money (Cisco's a big company,
> but my budget is still tiny :-) ). That turned out to be a fun little
> program called iShowU for OS X that does screen scraping + audio
> capture. It outputs Quicktime movies, so that was really my only
> Is it a real hardship for people to install the QT player? Are there
> easy-to-install convertors? I'm not opposed to hosting it in multiple
> formats if it's easy and free to convert them.
> Jeff Squyres
> Cisco Systems
> users mailing list