Video on Instagram
blog.instagram.com
blog.instagram.com
Instagram talks a good game, but I find this to be more unimaginative dreck. Look, I get it, you need to clone Vine to stay competitive, but it's not new or a re-imagining of the video paradigm.
Most of these social startups promise unique experiences based on new forms of social interaction, but really only deliver more ways to watch cats dance on the internet.
Bring on the hardcore technology like better Ethernet Switching, Less Apps please.
I highly doubt FB would consider pre-rolling an ad on a 15 second clip. Youtube is the king of pre-rolls... they probably have a min length requirement before they will insert a pre-roll.
Ads don't make much sense on a 15 second clip.
Systrom specifically said that videos will post natively to the timeline.
--
Q: Will videos post natively, on FB Timeline?
A: Yes. You’ll be able to see videos right in your timeline.
*If this is any indication youtube's is pretty good, but not as seamless: http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2012/05/video-stabilizati...
Though we haven't seen a video comparison yet.
Shouting out about how awesome your tech is when it's someone else's tech that you didn't exclusively-license is lame.
It in no way uses the iOS SDK.
It's called marketing.
I couldn't agree more with the "less app please" statement - but we live in a very skewed reality these days. Apps like Vine take off in weeks from people posting the dumbest, worst, lowest quality videos of their cats and themselves eating food. Instagram destroyed photography by making an 8MP smartphone camera <1MP with a square polaroid-like frame and the worst destructive filters of all-time. It's just a vicious cycle of bullshit. When will it end?
The state of technology, rather consumer technology, is indicative of the consumer - and unfortunately, the average consumer isn't very bright.
As someone who has been involved with photography since the days of 35mm film and someone who has developed their own B&W in a lab - Instagram (and Vine) are regressions of the art. They utilize and encourage poor quality images, poor ratios, and poor choice in taste (cats and food pictures and people flexing in gyms).
But it DOES NOT matter - the consumer wants this, demands it, uses it, so it works. That's an entirely different problem than the photo/video quality issue.
If you look at a platform like 500px, you'll see immense quality - but again, doesn't matter, >90% of people are incapable of creating photos like that. So they don't some crapware to share their food. More power to them.
What can we do to improve the default pictures taken with smartphone cameras? The picture you get with that tiny camera isn't very good, even now, though I think that Instagram is an improvement.
The "default" smartphone photos are leaps and bounds better than IG, the only thing that will "improve" them is higher res cameras, I'm sure the iPhone 5S will see an 18MP camera with better software. Just look at panorama - that's a serious achievement in smartphone cameras.
Sharing photos is a different question/issue all together.
500px is a perfect example of an application that takes advantage of high-quality images, whether taken with a dSLR or not.
However, let's not start idolizing the networking field so quickly. This in an industry with a lot of entrenched interests, which, like in all B2B businesses, leads to a lot of FUD being spread around and glacier-paced rates for adopting new technologies. There's plenty that I envy about the consumer app space.
In any case, if you guys are interested in learning more about some of the hard technical problems being tackled in the networking space, I'd be happy to do a couple of writeups exploring the non-consumer world of tech. (And, if that stuff tickles your fancy, we're hiring!)
Why does it have to be? And besides, by adding video, Instagram just put its boot on the throat of Vine. I already deleted Vine from my phone -- I went from seldom using it to having absolutely no need to use it.
Less Apps please.
They added video capability while maintaining the exact same user flow to take a photo. That's how you add a feature. It's a huge win for users.
(Edited to make more sense.)
It does not use any standard iOS libraries in any way whatsoever.
15 seconds of video with 13 custom filters
You can choose the cover frame.
Available for Android/iOS.
Can view on web as well.
New feature - 'Cinema' - cinematic stabilisation.
That's the most important part. Beautiful.
What I'm interested in is what will happen to Vine. Vine was meant to be this great sharing solution for moments recorded in video. It had its moment when it first launched, then dipped in popularity, and only recently started getting popular again. Its use has not skyrocketed (I could be wrong). My belief is that it's because taking a good video is hard, harder I think, than taking a good picture.
So, it's likely that Instagram will able to bullishly leverage its existing and talented user base to take full advantage of the video feature. What about the majority? I'm worried that most Instagram users won't use the feature as actively because they are too intimidated. I mean I looked at the cafe latte example and it was practically cinematic. Is the Average Joe expected to take a video like that?
I think this is the right step for Instagram but I'm not sure whether they've solved the essential problem in sharing these video moments.
But... they forgot to mention that Twitter was promoting Vine heavily during this time.
My Instagram social network is largely independent of the other large ones (twitter, FB, G+) with only a slight overlap, so it definitely deserves its own consumption, and would also explain the reason that the vine shares are more prevalent on twitter than instagram shares.
Am i the only one who doesn't think those filter app pictures look nice? I don't understand how so many people find it beautiful...
add a sarcastic voice to this message
My manager taught me that it was far, far better for my users to discover the beauty themselves. "Under promise, over deliver." Let the user get excited about the functionality - the most beautiful or easy to use products don't need to list 'beauty' as a feature.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZS8HqOGTbA Apple Keynote by Steve Jobs in 180 sec.
Anyways, I feel I'm being played by all the media attention that this got. Since when an app update gets all this attention ? Are we getting so superficial that this stuff really gets so many spotlights ?
It's not even a new app or anything disruptive, it's just Vine on Instagram with edition mode.
http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2012/05/video-stabilizati...
EDIT: the demo video on that link above is pretty spectacular.
EDIT:
Now the Play Store page is saying "CURRENT VERSION: Varies with device"
I haven't seen that before. It's not letting me install it on my Galaxy Nexus as of yet. Is there a list of devices that the latest version of Instagram works on?
Edit 2:
Looking at Instagram in the Play Store app on my phone, the description is saying that it's supported on devices with Jellybean (4.1) and above. My Galaxy Nexus is rooted, and I'm running a custom ROM of 4.2.2.... but it is still not allowing me to install v4.0 of Instagram. Strange.
That being said, I'm not excited about this update. I love Instagram, but mostly for it's simplicity; the number of vines on my Twitter feed worth watching is astonishingly low, and this will only produce, IMO, more content not worth watching.
Do you think for a second that IG/FB devs sat there writing an image stabilization algorithm? No chance.
Instagram going video is the RIGHT MOVE for the product, 100% - but, it's just another regurgitated copy of another app, which was a copy of another app, and so goes the cycle of bullshit.
UPDATE: It looks like it's back (kinda): https://vimeo.com/68765934
It is nice that there is an option for videos to not play automatically, but I would still rather just not see videos all together.
I can tell you now that there is going to be a lot of "unfollowing" in the near future with this new feature.
I wonder if their Android app drove much of their adoption in the past year or so, and as such, they decided to make sure they could launch feature-complete apps on both platforms on day one?
If so - will Android finally start getting apps on pace with iOS?
My reaction in general is the same as the tagging feature- I'd prefer it didn't have it, as I like Instagram as a service for almost taking abstract photos (landscapes, patterns) than of me and my friends on nights out. But I also realise that it is inevitable, what with them being owned by Facebook.
"Based on how they were being positioned for the summer launch, video ads will appear to targeted users in their news feeds up to three times on the day they’re slotted and will begin silently playing when a user scrolls over them, according to source who heard Facebook’s pitch.
Audio won’t be activated unless a user clicks on the 15-second ad, at which point it will restart and spread over the right- and left-hand rails of the page."
This does have filters but I don't think that'll make up for it
#1: Wasn't obvious that you had to press and hold to record, and removing your finger from the record button pauses the recording. #2: The app seems to crash a fair bit. And when it crashes, your video disappears. Basically, I finished recording, and was trying to select a location.
It'd be a better experience if videos that you haven't posted yet are saved somewhere (ie: camera roll) so you can post it later.
To be honest, video is not something I'm going to be doing a lot of. Maybe once or twice, here and there (if I even remember it's there).
I worry that, with video, Instagram will now be slow to load. I can't set aside time for "Instagram surfing"; it was a fun distraction during otherwise boring times—check in with your friends while you are stuck somewhere else.
I always felt video wasn't ready for prime time.
Seems like an improvement. Adding video to their app doesn't feel like a clone (though it is) but a logical extension and I am sure many people will be happy to use this. It's unfortunate that twitter still won't allow for previews of these items.
I know vine is not going anywhere but this puts them in a weird spot.
http://instagram.com/developer/endpoints/users/
They were already prepared for video.
The deal was a billion dollars, keep building the product, or say no and prepare to compete head-on with Facebook in an all-out war.
I don't think any sane person would have taken the latter.
WTF? There was no innovation in Vine at all. In fact, its more like Vine made a clone of Instagram in the first place. Videos on Instagram is just a logical improvement, slow evolution of the service. Nobody complains that Facebook allows to upload videos, and that it's trying to clone youtube after all.
Kudos to you Facebook.
Yes, video filters are hard. That makes them worth doing.
Personally, I think everything around how Facebook does groups is broken.
Get out of the single-vertical-column shackles.
That speaks volumes about this service.
Use "Viemo" to promote your video platform :)