JVC PRO HD on Stage6
 

Hey guys and gals. I've been frequenting this forum ever the JVC HD100 first hit the market. The hd100 is a great camera. I love all of the information presented here and my film-making skills have definitely improved as a result of this community.

So here's what I'm proposing. I'm a huge fan of Stage6 and honestly, it always hurts a little when I see some of us showing off our beautiful work with youtube, or small quicktime links. I've almost got enough karma on Stage6 to start my own channel, and I'd like to start one dedicated to JVC PRO HD and particularly this forum.

So how about it? Its pretty easy to re-encode to Divx/Xvid (checkout Dr. Divx...its free). You can either upload your own content and I can add it to the channel, or you can provide me with a DL link and I'll put it up myself (giving you all the proper credit you rightfully deserve). Once its in a channel you can simply browse through videos and see what other people have created with their JVC HD 100/110/200/250.

There's no catch. Stage6 is free. It can stream 720p/1080i/1080i, and allows you to go fullscreen. It even provides a download link. Tell me what you all think.

[dan]

Here's the website if you've never been: www.stage6.com

Well, I didn't think much of that. Installed the required web plugin at which point Vista (I know but I can't slipstream XP onto this box) freaked out and switched me over to a basic theme just so the player would work.

I tried a couple out and wasn't impressed to be honest. I've encoded video to Flash Video using the On2 encoder which is completely awesome and way better than youtube or even the adobe crap encoders that come with flash and premiere (yes I know it's On2 as well but a totally stripped down version).

I'm very impressed with On2 and I think if more of you gave it a try and tweaked your 2 pass conversions you would be very impressed.

My 2 cents for what they aren't worth :)

Julian

I agree that the On2 is great (though I personally do not use it). I suppose that the allure of divx and stage6 is that stage6 hosts and streams for free. That's why I thought it'd be cool to pool our videos and make a channel.

The seems to be an attempt by the DivX people to create some sort of momentum for their player. (It is hosted by them). IMHO it seems like a losing proposition given that there are other players that are more ubiquitous and arguably better. I am sure others might differ but does the world really need another player? - and should I have to download it to see the video on the site?

I remember using it a couple years ago and it just seemed to be problematic. No incentive to try again. There are lots of sites that will host video for free.

I didn't want to turn this into a "defend divx" thread. I haven't seen any other video site that allows you to upload and stream videos at such great quality for free.

If DivX isn't your thing, that's fine, but look at the sticky at the top of this forum w/ links to peoples work. the majority is youtube! I just thought it'd be cool to have a place to showcase, share, and swap our work in all its glory. Stage6 is just the means that came to mind.

Hey Dan,

I'm an Canon guy who stopped by your forum. I agree with you that Stage6 is a great place to share your work. Post your stuff there and put up some links, there's lots of us who've already downloaded the player. 'Course I don't stop by your JVC forum too often so you'll have to put a note up in "Show your Work" for me to see it.

I have to admit, I'm more likely to view others work on youtube (even though I hate it), than waiting for a downloaded wmv or quicktime file.

i'm the opposite
 

no offense to the previous poster, but if it says Youtube or something like that, I won't waste my time looking at it.
Part of the reason I look at videos of different cameras is I want to see what type of image they're capable of producing, but when you see it on Youtube or something of that ilk, it may as well have shot it with a mobile phone. So why you may get the feel of artistic direction and lighting etc, it just doesn't IMHO cut it.
And if I see a option to download a video, I always take it over streaming, so I can watch later as well as a reference tool, I actually might be rare and hate streaming unless like quicktime I can save it.
Anyway my ten cents worth
Adam

I´ve used stage6 before and I think you get pretty close to original results - it´s at least useful for purposes of comparison. The only catch is the divx plugin required, and the larger filesizes than youtube.

one of mine:
http://stage6.divx.com/user/Hasus/vi...ll-2007---Spot

http://stage6.divx.com/user/SlightlyOffBeat/videos/

All were shot with my HD100, but sadly none were shot in HD. Nice video Thomas!