actionfrank

Also, an overwhelming majority of the views come from a very small percentage of videos. I read somewhere that over 99% of all videos on youtube have fewer than 100 views. In theory, google could easily identify the top 10,000 channels (which would probably cover the majority of views site wide), hire 1,000 employees, assign 10 channels to each employee, and then sell ads against the channels that make sense to sell ads against. Of course that will never happen, because the whole point of google is to automate human workers out of existence, even if humans could obviously do a better job at it.

I can't believe it took this long for advertisers to realize that it's risky to serve your ads up next to random, user generated content. Of course there are going to be awkward placements. Advertisers are very sensitive about associations with their brands. Glen Beck was fired from Fox News because he lost all his advertisers, and the same thing is happening to Bill O'Reilly night now. Tune into any number of popular Youtubers and they say stuff waaay more controversial than O'Reilly or Beck. No one should be surprised that Tide Dish Detergent doesn't want anything to do with Pew Die Pie. As an artist, he should be proud of that fact. There's always been a direct relationship between how much of your business depends on advertising and how bland your content needs to be. Broadcast TV is 100% ad based. That's why it's all sports, bland sitcoms, and boring dramas with no curse words. Cable TV is half and half, so it can be a little more daring. Then there's HBO who's free to do whatever they want. There are plenty of Youtube channels that fall into the mold of broadcast tv, family friendly content that Oreos or Pampers would be happy to sponsor. Dude Perfect is a great example. They get tons of advertisers because they do fun, super-clean videos. On the other hand, Pew Die Pie, who drops the f-bomb every 5 seconds is probably closer to the HBO end of the spectrum. An ad based model isn't gonna work for him. The realities of advertising don't change because #DigitalMedia. The fact that Pew Die Pie was able to pull in millions of advertising dollars up to this point was a fluke. If you want to be #controversial, you can't rely on dish detergent companies to pay your bills.

Yeah, I'd like to see how small can they make the GH4. My only issue with cameras like that is the battery life.

Panasonic is doing some really cool things, but I feel like their lineup isn't fully realized. The GH series is awesome, obviously. And the new Varicam has features that have simply never existed before, like a sensor with 2 native ISO ratings. All the technology is there. All they need to do is fill out the middle of their line-up. This is what I'd love to see from Panasonic: Tier 1 - DSLR style B Camera - GH4 - It already exists. It's awesome. It's the only DSLR that I don't actively hate shooting with. It's got 4k internal, a super versatile mount/sensor combo, v-log, it can fill the memory card without stopping the recording (I can't believe that's a feature nowadays), and don't forget my favorite feature, the insane battery life. Tier 2a - The "News" Camera - DVX200 - It already exists. From what I can tell, they ripped the guts out of a DVX100 and replaced them with a GH4. That's a great idea. The m43 sensor size is perfect for this style of camcorder. It's big enough to get a nice looking image, but not so big to be constantly searching for focus. The DVX form factor is battle tested with XLRs, ND filters, timecode I/O, AC power options, you know, everything video cameras used to have. It's not going to be adopted by the "micro-budget film" crowd, but plenty of people shoot news, docs, and events. If I shot more of that stuff, I'd buy a couple of these in a second. Tier 2b - The "Pro" GH4 - AF200 - Everyone was bummed out by the DVX200's fixed lens. I have to imagine Panasonic is going to release an AF200 which is basically the DVX with the lens ripped off. Sell it for under $4,000, and I'll buy 2. Rigs suck. Recording audio to a zoom recorder sucks. No timecode I/O sucks. No ND filters suck. Please Panasonic, just release this camera and take my money. Tier 3 - The "Shoulder" Camera - Varicam35 Mini - I would love to see this camera. It would be Panasonic's answer to the FS7. I imagine a shrunk down Varicam35, designed for a single operator. It would have a similar 35mm sensor, but with a m43 mount (like that JVC camera), 2 native ISO's, 4k, high frame rates in HD, ND's, XLR's, V-lock batteries, ENG style viewfinder, v-log, and great LUT integration. They can keep the RAW capabilities. As far as I'm concerned, if clients are asking for RAW, they've got budget for a rental. Give me a solid 10-bit 422 codec, and I'll be happy. Price it anywhere from 10-15 thousand, and it'll give the C300/FS7 crowd another great option. Tier 4 - The Rental - Varicam35 - It exists. It's an extremely well thought out camera. Panasonic may have been a couple years late with it, but they didn't cut any corners. Rent one. The LUT integration is really awesome. And let me repeat, 2 native ISO's!?!?! The traditional thinking would say my proposed Varicam Mini would cannibalize sales, but as long as they hold back that one high-end feature (RAW maybe?), it won't cannibalize the high-end projects that the Varicam is aimed at anyway. GET TO WORK PANASONIC