Next Gen Movie Delivery

J

JWinter

Well-known member
big studios negotiating with youtube to sell streaming movies.

streaming

on demand

digital download

I have about 4 movies coming out in the next 1-2 years and cant say for sure its even going to be worth printing DVD.

The last hold out for printing would be having them on hand for magazine reviews (not as valuable as they used to be considering user reviews) or bulk orders (could just by a duplicator for bulk orders (if we are lucky enough to actually have them).

anyone else considering these questions?


anyone know what it take to ---- effectively/efficiently ---- provide streaming content? (Amazon takes too much and sets their own prices)
 
Printing on DVD might be fading but printing on Blu-Ray won't since no one streams 1080p. What's the highest anyone is streaming right now? 480?
 
Z's right, I think we're a few years away from everyone streaming their movies online. If you're making a film in the next year or two I would consider DVD as a part of the delv. medium. Good luck.
 
I think I may have to disagree on this one. I know several people who *ahem* have downlo_ded b--tleg *ahem* movies in 1240x720p. So digital delivery is not impossible by today's standards.
 
jls4 is correct on that one. it’s not just about DVD VS DDL or [insert latest unknown or emerging]

DVD can still be printed but with companies like REDBOX and the gaining proliferation of online movie rental (unauthorized / boutique as well as Amazon and others who proclaim “we set the prices”) and peer to peer- There are many competing options for a user. And if you are a content provider and you want to make money off your DVD/Product you need to consider:

Offering the same convenience: Buy DVD or Rent DVD or Subscribe to DVD or Download DVD = user choice. All must be on your website. If you don’t, the links (s) right below (or above you) on Google search results – will! And you won’t get a dime.

Now the other thing is, just like the big studios now grappling with REDBOX, you lose anyway. The product is now highly devalued and you have to slash prices AND spend a fortune to have a slick website that offers all the new delivery options – at a lower cost that you did a year or two ago. But, if you can’t beat um – join um – right?.

To someone making a doc or indie film you might not care, but if you do content that traditionally had a higher cost (like training DVDs or specialty “products” that have video and other media/software on them) it might matter more.

Either way, the devaluation is now built in before you even hit the streets.
For these reasons, I wanted to post because whether or not I print DVDs of new releases I am currently looking at the other delivery mediums / technologies and wondering the best way (s) to implement it if I want to.

So far, I have been looking at stuff like Google App Engine http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/whatisgoogleappengine.html VS AWS http://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/ VS http://www.rackspacecloud.com/cloud_hosting_products and that’s just for hosting video!! Sure, I host my own now but it’s not efficient – especially if you start to look at doing “subscription” to content and the content is long form + high rez options.

I talked to RackSpace and they said: The global capacity of the CDN is rated at 2Tbps, when you then take into account network traffic, this would still be faster than progressive downloads from a normal web server.

So it’s a work in progress here – anyone else looking at this stuff please share experiences.
 
To me, it's not either/or. It's all of them. If there is money to be made on content however it wants to be consumed, I will make it availble for that channel. It's all additive.

Michael
 
When youtube views passed prime time tv ratings, it was pretty obvious the movie industry would have to follow suit. We all know what is to come. They key is to not just go with it, but to lead the way.
 
It's all on how it gets monetized. If YouTube wants to license my content to stream everywhere all the time, great! But me posting it does not get me much other than telling people how many hits I may have gotten. I was on a panel where all the talk was about the number of hits their shorts have gotten, etc. and when I asked how much money are you making? Nada. Great marketing tool, just not a whole lot of $$ yet for anyone wanting to sell content. On the same panel when asked how they did make money, they said they made a compilation DVD of all the shorts and sold it that way.

It is an evolution - it's all headed that way, but as I said in my previous post, for me it is all additive. My content sits ready to be delivered as Digital Cinema, HDCAM SR, DVD, and iPhone.

Michael
 
Yes, this has been one of the big questions over on Stacy Parks distribution site called Film Specific. The current thinking is that we are still a few years away yet (technologically speaking). Meanwhile, I'm stocking up making short movies in anticipation of that day. No one has made any money from a short since maybe 1932... Well, that may all change in a few years. I think we'll be following the iTunes model. You won't get rich on one or two, but what if you had 15, 20, 30 or more, short movies out there? Might get into some serious money. That's my bet anyway.
 
That's been the case Grinner. But now consider all the other releasing outlets, i.e. the iPhone, etc. That small screen isn't really conducive to watching a full length movie, BUT it may be perfect for watching a cool 10 minute comedy while you're standing in line at the DMV waiting to get your car registered. What would you pay for that? $2.50? $1.50? 99cents? 89cents? Point is, it's going to be an impulse buy the way iTunes sells songs for 99 cents. Now do some math with a bunch of them available to a world-wide market. With your low product producing costs...Could be interesting numbers.
 
I do like the thought but to answer your question, I'd sooner surf youtube clips for free. I do know this is new to consumers but I've waded the waves of podcasting and folks simply don't purchase video they've not heard of. I've gotten more revenue through product placement or banner ads with free video than with pay per views so far.
We'll see where it goes. It's certainly not something I am against... just not something I'm counting on.
 
MichaelP said:
To me, it's not either/or. It's all of them. If there is money to be made on content however it wants to be consumed, I will make it availble for that channel. It's all additive.

Michael
Click to expand...
Agreed. I don't see physical media going away until everyone (globally) has access to fast, reliable broadband internet and a means to turn that connection in a viewing experience ( a computer, a set-top IPTV box, etc.,). The market for physical media will shrink (which it has to because it was the only option up until a couple of years ago) but it won't go away in the near future.

MichaelP said:
It's all on how it gets monetized. If YouTube wants to license my content to stream everywhere all the time, great! But me posting it does not get me much other than telling people how many hits I may have gotten. I was on a panel where all the talk was about the number of hits their shorts have gotten, etc. and when I asked how much money are you making? Nada. Great marketing tool, just not a whole lot of $$ yet for anyone wanting to sell content. On the same panel when asked how they did make money, they said they made a compilation DVD of all the shorts and sold it that way.
Click to expand...

I just finished reading Scott Kirsner's "Fans, Friends and Followers: Building an Audience and Creating a Career in the Digital Age" (very good read, IMO) and a few things really stuck out at me. First, the 'internet money' out there seems to be good enough for an individual operation w/low overhead costs but not much else. If you play solo guitar you've got a chance at making a living, but if you are part of a power trio the odds just got a lot worse. Getting 'internet only money' for huge productions like we are used to seeing for TV shows and movies still seems to be a long way off.

Second, many people are using the content they create as a loss leader for other things (merchandise, books, speaking engagements, etc.,). So the question becomes not only are you a good enough musician, for example, to gather an audience, but are you a good enough at other revenue generating avenues as well?

Third, as a way to help keep costs down some people depend on their fans to donate time, talent or even a couch to crash on while touring. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I'd be worried if my ability to pay rent is dependent on strangers willing to work for me for free. I also wonder how quickly the breaking point of this business by altruism model will be reached.


-A
 
Last edited:
Wow...Great posts guys! Lots of interesting thoughts here. To be honest, I guess my goal was to avoid the quagmire of the mainstream distribution world. It's just depressing and takes all the fun out of filmmaking. Also, doing shorts in anticipation of a future pay-off was a bit more attractive while running a full-time business, rather than the immense effort to do full length features (I've done two so far). Interesting things to ponder... Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top