or some custom code using the low level graphics API's in OS X
Im going to guess a native application, playing h.264 video with text over-lays, using core animation for transformations.
Apple doesn't allow 3rd party run-time engines or any other code interpreters on their mobile devices, so you're never going to see Flash on the iPad. Outside of native OS X code, the only other code that gets executed is run inside of WebKit.
Animation responding to and effecting video? This doesn't seem likely, do you have any iPhone examples? Adobe has created an option to render Flash movies as iPhone Apps. http://theflashblog.com/?p=1737
Quote:
Originally Posted by connector
I don't think publishers get it. This "motion graphics->pause->read->continue" model is so dated! I want my information fast and easy to consume! If your visuals don't convey the information then get them out of my way! This is the same old formula that was used on CDs and DVDs back in the 90's. Yeah sure you can download it instead of mail it but in the end it's still boring! And you come out feeling like you waisted a bunch of time. Plus, by the time it makes it through production the content is dated. Have any of these producers read a blog lately? Blogs are where it's at and they will explode with the iPad!
My 21st century/web 3.0 definition of "interactive media" is an open socially interactive medium used to convey and share information. But, most importantly sharing opinions. It's not flashy buttons and motion graphics contained in a closed system. Yuck! The only way flashy buttons and motion graphics work today is if they convey the information and also provide a way to convey information. Ever play Halo?
We have all gotten over the "shiny" effect of digital media back in the 90's. Now we all want to opine with it and receive our 15 nanoseconds of fame! Twitter anyone?
P.S.
I bet the content creators of this demo are still waiting to get paid.
GREAT POINT!! This is all very 1990's... Other than like a movie trailer site, something like this doesn't work anymore. Interesting to see what new directions media could go in....
I was referring to the concept. Now entering my 4th decade in this business. Have a good idea what, how, when and where these things will work.
If you were referring to the concept, then why did you reference watching it on your iPhone as proof that it's QT? As was stated above, there are a number of ways to do something like this....Please don't list your experience as some kind of way to pull rank here. I have a background in media as well. One massive QT file would be a horrible way to excute....Looks like maybe you could use another decade in the field \
We used to try to recreate Star Trek technology. Now we're working on Harry Potter technology. I'm not saying that this technology preview is without merit, but it's not what I'm looking for in a magazine. I want to concentrate on the words and the analysis. If this type of media is sidebar material, fine, but it shouldn't get in the way of my reading. As the saying goes, "When you have a useful new technology, someone will find a way to crap it up."
I think you have hit on the most important piece about this demo. Extremely compelling but also cost prohibitive for virtually every publisher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mistergreen
This is all fine and well.... will be interesting to see who is paying for it. Will enough people run to this medium and be willing to shell out the money for a subscription. And where are the ads?
I am a professional photographer (somewhat nationally known) and the typical rate for most magazine shoots ranges from $250 to $1,000 plus some expenses. A few photogs at the highest levels get big dollars (for mags like Vogue or Vanity Fair), but Time pays $1,500 for a cover.
This shoot undoubtedly cost around $100K. Rates like this are typically ad campaign rates and not editorial. Should be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
content is still more important than flashy pics and sound. give me the WSJ and NYT and i will be happy.
I can't imagine why we need such distraction while reading an article. Okay it gives animators some work and that's cool but I could only see myself turning off this "feature" and getting down to business with the written word.
Why in the world is a site like AppleInsiter still using flash in their stories? Its nice that they have a mobile, flash free version of it's site, but mobile sites SUCK. Even on my iPhone I chose to use full HTML sites over its mobile version (same will be done on my iPad). Consistency in look when jumping between moble and "full" Macs would be nice. Why not drop Flash, from AppleInsider.com, all together? I hope things change come April 3.
This is all fine and well.... will be interesting to see who is paying for it. Will enough people run to this medium and be willing to shell out the money for a subscription. And where are the ads?
I am a professional photographer (somewhat nationally known) and the typical rate for most magazine shoots ranges from $250 to $1,000 plus some expenses. A few photogs at the highest levels get big dollars (for mags like Vogue or Vanity Fair), but Time pays $1,500 for a cover.
This shoot undoubtedly cost around $100K. Rates like this are typically ad campaign rates and not editorial. Should be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
The production values of this demo certainly were terrific and there are a lot of ideas here that would still work with a lesser budget. Seems like a prime opportunity for enterprising small studios to offer their services to the large publishing houses. Might be a day soon that we start seeing interactive magazine cover work migrating to Canada, not just film and TV production!
That's supposedly 1 article in a single issue of a magazine ? Sheesh - if that's the case then magazines are going to take several months of production and cost about $50 an issue !
Cover story only, from my POV. Other feature articles could implement some more limited animation but still be very creative on the interactive side.
This is a whole new angle toward photography. Hopefully the tools will exist for this sort of work. Motion and After Effects don't seem quite focused in this niche. This isn't exactly a typical video workflow. I can see simpler examples too. Someway to easily create cyclic motion. I look forward to the newspapers in Harry Potter now!
Use of HTML5 could make some very exciting interactive, even simulated 3D effects very compelling.
I don't think publishers get it. This "motion graphics->pause->read->continue" model is so dated! I want my information fast and easy to consume! If your visuals don't convey the information then get them out of my way! This is the same old formula that was used on CDs and DVDs back in the 90's. Yeah sure you can download it instead of mail it but in the end it's still boring! And you come out feeling like you waisted a bunch of time. Plus, by the time it makes it through production the content is dated. Have any of these producers read a blog lately? Blogs are where it's at and they will explode with the iPad!
My 21st century/web 3.0 definition of "interactive media" is an open socially interactive medium used to convey and share information. But, most importantly sharing opinions. It's not flashy buttons and motion graphics contained in a closed system. Yuck! The only way flashy buttons and motion graphics work today is if they convey the information and also provide a way to convey information. Ever play Halo?
We have all gotten over the "shiny" effect of digital media back in the 90's. Now we all want to opine with it and receive our 15 nanoseconds of fame! Twitter anyone?
P.S.
I bet the content creators of this demo are still waiting to get paid.
Are you kidding? This little demo is probably worth 10x worth of advertising for this magazine. This clip will be widely seen and commented on.
I thought it was awesome and a good example of how to bring print media to life. To me this is what the iPad should be all about ... not just another device to do what we can already do, but one that changes the experience of how we interact with media.
I don't think I've ever read such a unending stream of negative comments. There's a place for WSJ style print media, and there's a place for dynamic immersive content. And yes its probably expensive to shoot this article today, but the cost will plummet as the tools are mass produced and the software automates the skills. Oh, and as for the comment complaining that "this sort of sexual topic ought to be handled more discretely", give me a ******* break.
or some custom code using the low level graphics API's in OS X
Im going to guess a native application, playing h.264 video with text over-lays, using core animation for transformations.
Apple doesn't allow 3rd party run-time engines or any other code interpreters on their mobile devices, so you're never going to see Flash on the iPad. Outside of native OS X code, the only other code that gets executed is run inside of WebKit.
The tools used to create and assemble content suitable for iPad consumption needs to get way, waaaaaay easier. A small team of writer, designer/art director production artist and coder (with some obvious overlap in each) should be able to put together a project in a day using standardized tools. Who will create these tools? I've seen a lot of over-engineered junk that only coders can use and a lot of under-engineered junk only designers can use... with no middle ground in sight yet.
Funny, I'm curious how that presentation was built.... Fluid video and graphics with scrolling text boxes, tilted at 45 degree angles... looks like Flash to me....Hope it's not just a giant QuickTime movie either...
What are you talking about? HTML5 and CSS3 can do that extremely easily.
Just goes to show what can be done with the Red One in the hands of the brain-dead.
Awesome! \
(Passion Pit rocks, though)
That sums it up well, if crudely.
It will appeal to most people ( for 15 seconds,) children (for a time,) and to people who hate magazines or are stupid (for a longer time.)
Why do imagineerings like this always go toward the cinematographic? Shows a lack imagination desperately seeking to appear imaginative. And nice, on top of expensive crappy fiilerwe get a linear maze like navigation to boot.
Better examples of where this should go (assuming some contextual adaption) appear in the NYT every day.
What are you talking about? HTML5 and CSS3 can do that extremely easily.
Flash is not required at all.
Speaking of which, who here is a pro with HTML5 and CSS? What tools on the Mac are recommended for beginners wanting to create interactive content suitable for iPad consumption?
It will appeal to most people ( for 15 seconds,) children (for a time,) and to people who hate magazines or are stupid (for a longer time.)
Why do imagineerings like this always go toward the cinematographic? Shows a lack imagination desperately seeking to appear imaginative. And nice, on top of expensive crappy fiilerwe get a linear maze like navigation to boot.
Better examples of where this should go (assuming some contextual adaption) appear in the NYT every day.
I appreciate anyone attempting to push things forward, which this company has AFAIAC. Looking forward to seeing real product.
Comments
or Core Animation
or OpenGL
or some custom code using the low level graphics API's in OS X
Im going to guess a native application, playing h.264 video with text over-lays, using core animation for transformations.
Apple doesn't allow 3rd party run-time engines or any other code interpreters on their mobile devices, so you're never going to see Flash on the iPad. Outside of native OS X code, the only other code that gets executed is run inside of WebKit.
Animation responding to and effecting video? This doesn't seem likely, do you have any iPhone examples? Adobe has created an option to render Flash movies as iPhone Apps. http://theflashblog.com/?p=1737
I don't think publishers get it. This "motion graphics->pause->read->continue" model is so dated! I want my information fast and easy to consume! If your visuals don't convey the information then get them out of my way! This is the same old formula that was used on CDs and DVDs back in the 90's. Yeah sure you can download it instead of mail it but in the end it's still boring! And you come out feeling like you waisted a bunch of time. Plus, by the time it makes it through production the content is dated. Have any of these producers read a blog lately? Blogs are where it's at and they will explode with the iPad!
My 21st century/web 3.0 definition of "interactive media" is an open socially interactive medium used to convey and share information. But, most importantly sharing opinions. It's not flashy buttons and motion graphics contained in a closed system. Yuck! The only way flashy buttons and motion graphics work today is if they convey the information and also provide a way to convey information. Ever play Halo?
We have all gotten over the "shiny" effect of digital media back in the 90's. Now we all want to opine with it and receive our 15 nanoseconds of fame! Twitter anyone?
P.S.
I bet the content creators of this demo are still waiting to get paid.
GREAT POINT!! This is all very 1990's... Other than like a movie trailer site, something like this doesn't work anymore. Interesting to see what new directions media could go in....
I was referring to the concept. Now entering my 4th decade in this business. Have a good idea what, how, when and where these things will work.
If you were referring to the concept, then why did you reference watching it on your iPhone as proof that it's QT? As was stated above, there are a number of ways to do something like this....Please don't list your experience as some kind of way to pull rank here. I have a background in media as well. One massive QT file would be a horrible way to excute....Looks like maybe you could use another decade in the field
This is all fine and well.... will be interesting to see who is paying for it. Will enough people run to this medium and be willing to shell out the money for a subscription. And where are the ads?
I am a professional photographer (somewhat nationally known) and the typical rate for most magazine shoots ranges from $250 to $1,000 plus some expenses. A few photogs at the highest levels get big dollars (for mags like Vogue or Vanity Fair), but Time pays $1,500 for a cover.
This shoot undoubtedly cost around $100K. Rates like this are typically ad campaign rates and not editorial. Should be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
content is still more important than flashy pics and sound. give me the WSJ and NYT and i will be happy.
I can't imagine why we need such distraction while reading an article. Okay it gives animators some work and that's cool but I could only see myself turning off this "feature" and getting down to business with the written word.
This is all fine and well.... will be interesting to see who is paying for it. Will enough people run to this medium and be willing to shell out the money for a subscription. And where are the ads?
I am a professional photographer (somewhat nationally known) and the typical rate for most magazine shoots ranges from $250 to $1,000 plus some expenses. A few photogs at the highest levels get big dollars (for mags like Vogue or Vanity Fair), but Time pays $1,500 for a cover.
This shoot undoubtedly cost around $100K. Rates like this are typically ad campaign rates and not editorial. Should be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
The production values of this demo certainly were terrific and there are a lot of ideas here that would still work with a lesser budget. Seems like a prime opportunity for enterprising small studios to offer their services to the large publishing houses. Might be a day soon that we start seeing interactive magazine cover work migrating to Canada, not just film and TV production!
Holy Crap! Vimeo is so completely useless! (on an older machine.)
Flash is bad enough, but when Flash serves up anything from Vimeo it becomes total CPU grinding crap.
I'll have to get out my MBP laptop to view this.
This isn't Twitter. You don't need to update everyone here on your every decision.
That's supposedly 1 article in a single issue of a magazine ? Sheesh - if that's the case then magazines are going to take several months of production and cost about $50 an issue !
Cover story only, from my POV. Other feature articles could implement some more limited animation but still be very creative on the interactive side.
This is a whole new angle toward photography. Hopefully the tools will exist for this sort of work. Motion and After Effects don't seem quite focused in this niche. This isn't exactly a typical video workflow. I can see simpler examples too. Someway to easily create cyclic motion. I look forward to the newspapers in Harry Potter now!
Use of HTML5 could make some very exciting interactive, even simulated 3D effects very compelling.
I don't think publishers get it. This "motion graphics->pause->read->continue" model is so dated! I want my information fast and easy to consume! If your visuals don't convey the information then get them out of my way! This is the same old formula that was used on CDs and DVDs back in the 90's. Yeah sure you can download it instead of mail it but in the end it's still boring! And you come out feeling like you waisted a bunch of time. Plus, by the time it makes it through production the content is dated. Have any of these producers read a blog lately? Blogs are where it's at and they will explode with the iPad!
My 21st century/web 3.0 definition of "interactive media" is an open socially interactive medium used to convey and share information. But, most importantly sharing opinions. It's not flashy buttons and motion graphics contained in a closed system. Yuck! The only way flashy buttons and motion graphics work today is if they convey the information and also provide a way to convey information. Ever play Halo?
We have all gotten over the "shiny" effect of digital media back in the 90's. Now we all want to opine with it and receive our 15 nanoseconds of fame! Twitter anyone?
P.S.
I bet the content creators of this demo are still waiting to get paid.
Are you kidding? This little demo is probably worth 10x worth of advertising for this magazine. This clip will be widely seen and commented on.
I don't think I've ever read such a unending stream of negative comments. There's a place for WSJ style print media, and there's a place for dynamic immersive content. And yes its probably expensive to shoot this article today, but the cost will plummet as the tools are mass produced and the software automates the skills. Oh, and as for the comment complaining that "this sort of sexual topic ought to be handled more discretely", give me a ******* break.
or Core Animation
or OpenGL
or some custom code using the low level graphics API's in OS X
Im going to guess a native application, playing h.264 video with text over-lays, using core animation for transformations.
Apple doesn't allow 3rd party run-time engines or any other code interpreters on their mobile devices, so you're never going to see Flash on the iPad. Outside of native OS X code, the only other code that gets executed is run inside of WebKit.
The tools used to create and assemble content suitable for iPad consumption needs to get way, waaaaaay easier. A small team of writer, designer/art director production artist and coder (with some obvious overlap in each) should be able to put together a project in a day using standardized tools. Who will create these tools? I've seen a lot of over-engineered junk that only coders can use and a lot of under-engineered junk only designers can use... with no middle ground in sight yet.
Funny, I'm curious how that presentation was built.... Fluid video and graphics with scrolling text boxes, tilted at 45 degree angles... looks like Flash to me....Hope it's not just a giant QuickTime movie either...
What are you talking about? HTML5 and CSS3 can do that extremely easily.
Flash is not required at all.
Yeah, prettiest diarrhea squirt I've ever seen.
Just goes to show what can be done with the Red One in the hands of the brain-dead.
Awesome!
(Passion Pit rocks, though)
That sums it up well, if crudely.
It will appeal to most people ( for 15 seconds,) children (for a time,) and to people who hate magazines or are stupid (for a longer time.)
Why do imagineerings like this always go toward the cinematographic? Shows a lack imagination desperately seeking to appear imaginative. And nice, on top of expensive crappy fiilerwe get a linear maze like navigation to boot.
Better examples of where this should go (assuming some contextual adaption) appear in the NYT every day.
What are you talking about? HTML5 and CSS3 can do that extremely easily.
Flash is not required at all.
Speaking of which, who here is a pro with HTML5 and CSS? What tools on the Mac are recommended for beginners wanting to create interactive content suitable for iPad consumption?
That sums it up well, if crudely.
It will appeal to most people ( for 15 seconds,) children (for a time,) and to people who hate magazines or are stupid (for a longer time.)
Why do imagineerings like this always go toward the cinematographic? Shows a lack imagination desperately seeking to appear imaginative. And nice, on top of expensive crappy fiilerwe get a linear maze like navigation to boot.
Better examples of where this should go (assuming some contextual adaption) appear in the NYT every day.
I appreciate anyone attempting to push things forward, which this company has AFAIAC. Looking forward to seeing real product.
What are you talking about? HTML5 and CSS3 can do that extremely easily.
Flash is not required at all.
Great show us a proof of concept. Angled scrolling type especially.