I've had a look at the domain modules and organic groups and neither seems to do what I want. What I want is to create a domain/site structure like this: widgiemootha.example.org, wiluna.example.org, witchcliffe.example.org wagin.example.org wyalkatchem.example.org www.example.org birdiya.example.com Membership between all sites will be shared, but individuals might not actually be members of any particular site. Drupal's multisite allows sharing tables and so membership. As far as it goes, that is fine. Content associated with a site will only be visible at that site. A site's content at some paths, such as /About will override all others at that path. A site with nothing at /About _might_ inherit from birdiya, the boss site. On the other hand, /News might merge news from friends. Content shared with other sites will be visible at other sites. Aggegator is similar in content, but sharing will be explicit. One idea I have is to extend the node to have two more fields: owning site-id, and sharing attributes. I tried the domain modules, but when I was associated with two sites I got two /About menu items, and the implementation shared users behaved a little oddly: I want to switch back and forth between sites, maybe by choosing them from a list of links, and not to have any problems with sessions management or with access. The first question is, is it in order to modify the node table? I've googled and googled and not found an answer to that question.
You should probably avoid table sharing, and don't need it if you use domain or OG to partition content. If you want really separate sites, use a SSO solution. Since all your sites are under the same domain like example.org, you could use the simple and rather efficient bakery module. ________________________________________ De : development-bounces@drupal.org [development-bounces@drupal.org] de la part de John Summerfield [summer@js.id.au] Date d'envoi : dimanche 7 avril 2013 12:18 À : development@drupal.org Objet : [development] Advice on module writing I've had a look at the domain modules and organic groups and neither seems to do what I want. What I want is to create a domain/site structure like this: widgiemootha.example.org, wiluna.example.org, witchcliffe.example.org wagin.example.org wyalkatchem.example.org www.example.org birdiya.example.com Membership between all sites will be shared, but individuals might not actually be members of any particular site. Drupal's multisite allows sharing tables and so membership. As far as it goes, that is fine. Content associated with a site will only be visible at that site. A site's content at some paths, such as /About will override all others at that path. A site with nothing at /About _might_ inherit from birdiya, the boss site. On the other hand, /News might merge news from friends. Content shared with other sites will be visible at other sites. Aggegator is similar in content, but sharing will be explicit. One idea I have is to extend the node to have two more fields: owning site-id, and sharing attributes. I tried the domain modules, but when I was associated with two sites I got two /About menu items, and the implementation shared users behaved a little oddly: I want to switch back and forth between sites, maybe by choosing them from a list of links, and not to have any problems with sessions management or with access. The first question is, is it in order to modify the node table? I've googled and googled and not found an answer to that question.
On 07/04/13 22:26, fgm wrote:
You should probably avoid table sharing, and don't need it if you use domain or OG to partition content.
I tried really hard to explain that I tried both og and domains and that neither works for me. og is good to partition of content for a special interest group such as prolog programmers in a computer club. domain doesn't work because it wants to show me all the shared content I'm allowed to see whichever site I am viewing. In my case, everyone has to be known at birdiya.example.com, so sharing users seems simple and good. While all my sites share a common domain name, and that is what I intend, I don't intend to require it. If Wagerup wants to join in and already owns wagerup.example.net we can use that. birdiya.example.com should have been birdiya.example.org, but that shouldn't matter. Sharing user's isn't the greatest of my concerns, the other solutions fail because they do not share content the way I want to.
If you want really separate sites, use a SSO solution. Since all your sites are under the same domain like example.org, you could use the simple and rather efficient bakery module. ________________________________________ De : development-bounces@drupal.org [development-bounces@drupal.org] de la part de John Summerfield [summer@js.id.au] Date d'envoi : dimanche 7 avril 2013 12:18 À : development@drupal.org Objet : [development] Advice on module writing
I've had a look at the domain modules and organic groups and neither seems to do what I want.
What I want is to create a domain/site structure like this: widgiemootha.example.org, wiluna.example.org, witchcliffe.example.org wagin.example.org wyalkatchem.example.org www.example.org birdiya.example.com
Membership between all sites will be shared, but individuals might not actually be members of any particular site.
Drupal's multisite allows sharing tables and so membership. As far as it goes, that is fine.
Content associated with a site will only be visible at that site.
A site's content at some paths, such as /About will override all others at that path.
A site with nothing at /About _might_ inherit from birdiya, the boss site. On the other hand, /News might merge news from friends.
Content shared with other sites will be visible at other sites. Aggegator is similar in content, but sharing will be explicit.
One idea I have is to extend the node to have two more fields: owning site-id, and sharing attributes.
I tried the domain modules, but when I was associated with two sites I got two /About menu items, and the implementation shared users behaved a little oddly: I want to switch back and forth between sites, maybe by choosing them from a list of links, and not to have any problems with sessions management or with access.
The first question is, is it in order to modify the node table? I've googled and googled and not found an answer to that question.
I have done user-sharing via multi-site table prefixes before. For the love of god, don't do it. You're begging for trouble. I am pretty sure that with the right add-on modules like domain_path, Domain Access can do what you want, or at least close enough. For more information on multi-headed Drupal options, see: http://www.palantir.net/blog/multi-headed-drupal and the movie version: http://munich2012.drupal.org/program/sessions/multi-headed-drupal with slides available here: http://www.garfieldtech.com/presentations/dcmunich2012-multihead/ --Larry Garfield On 4/7/13 5:55 PM, John Summerfield wrote:
On 07/04/13 22:26, fgm wrote:
You should probably avoid table sharing, and don't need it if you use domain or OG to partition content.
I tried really hard to explain that I tried both og and domains and that neither works for me. og is good to partition of content for a special interest group such as prolog programmers in a computer club.
domain doesn't work because it wants to show me all the shared content I'm allowed to see whichever site I am viewing.
In my case, everyone has to be known at birdiya.example.com, so sharing users seems simple and good.
While all my sites share a common domain name, and that is what I intend, I don't intend to require it. If Wagerup wants to join in and already owns wagerup.example.net we can use that.
birdiya.example.com should have been birdiya.example.org, but that shouldn't matter.
Sharing user's isn't the greatest of my concerns, the other solutions fail because they do not share content the way I want to.
If you want really separate sites, use a SSO solution. Since all your sites are under the same domain like example.org, you could use the simple and rather efficient bakery module. ________________________________________ De : development-bounces@drupal.org [development-bounces@drupal.org] de la part de John Summerfield [summer@js.id.au] Date d'envoi : dimanche 7 avril 2013 12:18 À : development@drupal.org Objet : [development] Advice on module writing
I've had a look at the domain modules and organic groups and neither seems to do what I want.
What I want is to create a domain/site structure like this: widgiemootha.example.org, wiluna.example.org, witchcliffe.example.org wagin.example.org wyalkatchem.example.org www.example.org birdiya.example.com
Membership between all sites will be shared, but individuals might not actually be members of any particular site.
Drupal's multisite allows sharing tables and so membership. As far as it goes, that is fine.
Content associated with a site will only be visible at that site.
A site's content at some paths, such as /About will override all others at that path.
A site with nothing at /About _might_ inherit from birdiya, the boss site. On the other hand, /News might merge news from friends.
Content shared with other sites will be visible at other sites. Aggegator is similar in content, but sharing will be explicit.
One idea I have is to extend the node to have two more fields: owning site-id, and sharing attributes.
I tried the domain modules, but when I was associated with two sites I got two /About menu items, and the implementation shared users behaved a little oddly: I want to switch back and forth between sites, maybe by choosing them from a list of links, and not to have any problems with sessions management or with access.
The first question is, is it in order to modify the node table? I've googled and googled and not found an answer to that question.
On 09/04/13 00:51, Larry Garfield wrote:
I have done user-sharing via multi-site table prefixes before. For the love of god, don't do it. You're begging for trouble.
I am pretty sure that with the right add-on modules like domain_path, Domain Access can do what you want, or at least close enough.
I had a problem with content being published to one site being visible at another, and for this reason I found it unacceptable. However, I read your report and viewed your video and had another look. I have now discovered that what I observed is (bizarrely IMV) expected behaviour when the user is an administrator. I think I observed the behaviour for a second user, but it's possible I made the second user an administrator too. So for the moment that is what I will do.
On 4/18/13 9:00 PM, John Summerfield wrote:
On 09/04/13 00:51, Larry Garfield wrote:
I have done user-sharing via multi-site table prefixes before. For the love of god, don't do it. You're begging for trouble.
I am pretty sure that with the right add-on modules like domain_path, Domain Access can do what you want, or at least close enough.
I had a problem with content being published to one site being visible at another, and for this reason I found it unacceptable.
However, I read your report and viewed your video and had another look. I have now discovered that what I observed is (bizarrely IMV) expected behaviour when the user is an administrator. I think I observed the behaviour for a second user, but it's possible I made the second user an administrator too.
So for the moment that is what I will do.
Yes, you are able to give users "bypass node access" restriction, which would, I believe, then bypass domain access, too. Generally don't give that permission to people unless you really really mean it. :-) --Larry Garfield
On 20/04/13 02:22, Larry Garfield wrote:
Yes, you are able to give users "bypass node access" restriction, which would, I believe, then bypass domain access, too. Generally don't give that permission to people unless you really really mean it. :-)
Larry, on another note, a lot, maybe all, the Drupalcon videos are hard to read. I suspect someone points a camera at the screen and says, "That will do." A day or so ago I went through some of my less recent photos, and I found some from and Events Management event in Perth a year ago. Someone was talking to a slideshow, just like Drupalcons, and I took some pics of the screen. I didn't do anything special, just pointed the camera and let auto-everything do its magic. The results were fine, even on a DSLR approaching 10 years old. So I don't know what your videographers are doing, but they do need to sharpen up their act. I'm thinking it shouldn't be too hard to merge the audio with the slide presentation they already have. If the presenters rehearse (and they really should), they they can prerecord the audio and them be wired to an MP3 player in their pocket and parrot what they hear. It would mean absolutely no questions during the formal presentations though. Or just post the original audio and edit in questions later. Or something. You know who to talk to, Larry, and they know who you are. Perhaps you could take it up with them?
It may not be what you intended but this comes off as a bit disrespectful to the volunteers that make these kinds of events happen. I think having people parrot back from an mp3 player would seriuosly degrade the quality of the presentations. I also think that adding a lot of post production work to the process is problematic. Dave Sent from my iPad On Apr 21, 2013, at 1:52 AM, John Summerfield <summer@js.id.au> wrote:
On 20/04/13 02:22, Larry Garfield wrote:
Yes, you are able to give users "bypass node access" restriction, which would, I believe, then bypass domain access, too. Generally don't give that permission to people unless you really really mean it. :-)
Larry, on another note, a lot, maybe all, the Drupalcon videos are hard to read. I suspect someone points a camera at the screen and says, "That will do."
A day or so ago I went through some of my less recent photos, and I found some from and Events Management event in Perth a year ago. Someone was talking to a slideshow, just like Drupalcons, and I took some pics of the screen. I didn't do anything special, just pointed the camera and let auto-everything do its magic. The results were fine, even on a DSLR approaching 10 years old.
So I don't know what your videographers are doing, but they do need to sharpen up their act. I'm thinking it shouldn't be too hard to merge the audio with the slide presentation they already have.
If the presenters rehearse (and they really should), they they can prerecord the audio and them be wired to an MP3 player in their pocket and parrot what they hear. It would mean absolutely no questions during the formal presentations though. Or just post the original audio and edit in questions later. Or something.
You know who to talk to, Larry, and they know who you are. Perhaps you could take it up with them?
On 21/04/2013, at 8:15 PM, Dave Metzler <metzler.dl@gmail.com> wrote:
It may not be what you intended but this comes off as a bit disrespectful to the volunteers that make these kinds of events happen.
I think having people parrot back from an mp3 player would seriuosly degrade the quality of the presentations. I also think that adding a lot of post production work to the process is problematic.
Dave
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 21, 2013, at 1:52 AM, John Summerfield <summer@js.id.au> wrote:
On 20/04/13 02:22, Larry Garfield wrote:
Yes, you are able to give users "bypass node access" restriction, which would, I believe, then bypass domain access, too. Generally don't give that permission to people unless you really really mean it. :-)
Larry, on another note, a lot, maybe all, the Drupalcon videos are hard to read. I suspect someone points a camera at the screen and says, "That will do."
A day or so ago I went through some of my less recent photos, and I found some from and Events Management event in Perth a year ago. Someone was talking to a slideshow, just like Drupalcons, and I took some pics of the screen. I didn't do anything special, just pointed the camera and let auto-everything do its magic. The results were fine, even on a DSLR approaching 10 years old.
So I don't know what your videographers are doing, but they do need to sharpen up their act. I'm thinking it shouldn't be too hard to merge the audio with the slide presentation they already have.
If the presenters rehearse (and they really should), they they can prerecord the audio and them be wired to an MP3 player in their pocket and parrot what they hear. It would mean absolutely no questions during the formal presentations though. Or just post the original audio and edit in questions later. Or something.
You know who to talk to, Larry, and they know who you are. Perhaps you could take it up with them?
I think, fwiw, John's remarks are constructive criticism. Why does everyone play the "emotional I am so offended card" when one expresses intelligent analytical thinking? This type of thinking can only help us not hurt us. On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Dave Metzler <metzler.dl@gmail.com> wrote:
It may not be what you intended but this comes off as a bit disrespectful to the volunteers that make these kinds of events happen.
I think having people parrot back from an mp3 player would seriuosly degrade the quality of the presentations. I also think that adding a lot of post production work to the process is problematic.
Dave
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 21, 2013, at 1:52 AM, John Summerfield <summer@js.id.au> wrote:
On 20/04/13 02:22, Larry Garfield wrote:
Yes, you are able to give users "bypass node access" restriction, which would, I believe, then bypass domain access, too. Generally don't give that permission to people unless you really really mean it. :-)
Larry, on another note, a lot, maybe all, the Drupalcon videos are hard to read. I suspect someone points a camera at the screen and says, "That will do."
A day or so ago I went through some of my less recent photos, and I found some from and Events Management event in Perth a year ago. Someone was talking to a slideshow, just like Drupalcons, and I took some pics of the screen. I didn't do anything special, just pointed the camera and let auto-everything do its magic. The results were fine, even on a DSLR approaching 10 years old.
So I don't know what your videographers are doing, but they do need to sharpen up their act. I'm thinking it shouldn't be too hard to merge the audio with the slide presentation they already have.
If the presenters rehearse (and they really should), they they can prerecord the audio and them be wired to an MP3 player in their pocket and parrot what they hear. It would mean absolutely no questions during the formal presentations though. Or just post the original audio and edit in questions later. Or something.
You know who to talk to, Larry, and they know who you are. Perhaps you could take it up with them?
-- *Anthony Stefan Maciejowski* *www.Tony-Mac.com*
That was not my intention at all, nor was I offended, personally. I suspected that John was just trying to make suggestions for improving the process, and was just trying to let him know that his statements might be read. I do not think that your suggestion that I was playing some kind of emotional card is a fair characterization of my response. My own "analytical" thinking (intelligent or otherwise) suggests that as well intentioned as his ideas are, they do not look to "scale" to an event the size of Drupal CON, and should be tried out at a smaller event, preferably at one where the person who has the idea is willing to contribute time to making sure those ideas work. If I'm out of line, here, my apologies. Dave On Apr 21, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Anthony <tony@tony-mac.com> wrote:
I think, fwiw, John's remarks are constructive criticism. Why does everyone play the "emotional I am so offended card" when one expresses intelligent analytical thinking? This type of thinking can only help us not hurt us.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Dave Metzler <metzler.dl@gmail.com> wrote: It may not be what you intended but this comes off as a bit disrespectful to the volunteers that make these kinds of events happen.
I think having people parrot back from an mp3 player would seriuosly degrade the quality of the presentations. I also think that adding a lot of post production work to the process is problematic.
Dave
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 21, 2013, at 1:52 AM, John Summerfield <summer@js.id.au> wrote:
On 20/04/13 02:22, Larry Garfield wrote:
Yes, you are able to give users "bypass node access" restriction, which would, I believe, then bypass domain access, too. Generally don't give that permission to people unless you really really mean it. :-)
Larry, on another note, a lot, maybe all, the Drupalcon videos are hard to read. I suspect someone points a camera at the screen and says, "That will do."
A day or so ago I went through some of my less recent photos, and I found some from and Events Management event in Perth a year ago. Someone was talking to a slideshow, just like Drupalcons, and I took some pics of the screen. I didn't do anything special, just pointed the camera and let auto-everything do its magic. The results were fine, even on a DSLR approaching 10 years old.
So I don't know what your videographers are doing, but they do need to sharpen up their act. I'm thinking it shouldn't be too hard to merge the audio with the slide presentation they already have.
If the presenters rehearse (and they really should), they they can prerecord the audio and them be wired to an MP3 player in their pocket and parrot what they hear. It would mean absolutely no questions during the formal presentations though. Or just post the original audio and edit in questions later. Or something.
You know who to talk to, Larry, and they know who you are. Perhaps you could take it up with them?
-- Anthony Stefan Maciejowski
www.Tony-Mac.com
Maybe I must apologize. It's a peeve of mine. I welcome hard discussions and don't think we are as sensitive as many seem to think. And excessive deference just gets in the way. My 2 cents. On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 2:01 PM, David Metzler <metzler.dl@gmail.com> wrote:
That was not my intention at all, nor was I offended, personally. I suspected that John was just trying to make suggestions for improving the process, and was just trying to let him know that his statements might be read. I do not think that your suggestion that I was playing some kind of emotional card is a fair characterization of my response.
My own "analytical" thinking (intelligent or otherwise) suggests that as well intentioned as his ideas are, they do not look to "scale" to an event the size of Drupal CON, and should be tried out at a smaller event, preferably at one where the person who has the idea is willing to contribute time to making sure those ideas work.
If I'm out of line, here, my apologies.
Dave
On Apr 21, 2013, at 9:33 AM, Anthony <tony@tony-mac.com> wrote:
I think, fwiw, John's remarks are constructive criticism. Why does everyone play the "emotional I am so offended card" when one expresses intelligent analytical thinking? This type of thinking can only help us not hurt us.
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Dave Metzler <metzler.dl@gmail.com>wrote:
It may not be what you intended but this comes off as a bit disrespectful to the volunteers that make these kinds of events happen.
I think having people parrot back from an mp3 player would seriuosly degrade the quality of the presentations. I also think that adding a lot of post production work to the process is problematic.
Dave
Sent from my iPad
On Apr 21, 2013, at 1:52 AM, John Summerfield <summer@js.id.au> wrote:
On 20/04/13 02:22, Larry Garfield wrote:
Yes, you are able to give users "bypass node access" restriction, which would, I believe, then bypass domain access, too. Generally don't give that permission to people unless you really really mean it. :-)
Larry, on another note, a lot, maybe all, the Drupalcon videos are hard to read. I suspect someone points a camera at the screen and says, "That will do."
A day or so ago I went through some of my less recent photos, and I found some from and Events Management event in Perth a year ago. Someone was talking to a slideshow, just like Drupalcons, and I took some pics of the screen. I didn't do anything special, just pointed the camera and let auto-everything do its magic. The results were fine, even on a DSLR approaching 10 years old.
So I don't know what your videographers are doing, but they do need to sharpen up their act. I'm thinking it shouldn't be too hard to merge the audio with the slide presentation they already have.
If the presenters rehearse (and they really should), they they can prerecord the audio and them be wired to an MP3 player in their pocket and parrot what they hear. It would mean absolutely no questions during the formal presentations though. Or just post the original audio and edit in questions later. Or something.
You know who to talk to, Larry, and they know who you are. Perhaps you could take it up with them?
--
*Anthony Stefan Maciejowski*
*www.Tony-Mac.com <http://www.tony-mac.com/>*
-- *Anthony Stefan Maciejowski* *www.Tony-Mac.com*
On 22/04/13 05:01, David Metzler wrote:
My own "analytical" thinking (intelligent or otherwise) suggests that as well intentioned as his ideas are, they do not look to "scale" to an event the size of Drupal CON, and should be tried out at a smaller event, preferably at one where the person who has the idea is willing to contribute time to making sure those ideas work.
Whether any of my ideas is practical in the context of DrupalCON or not, I have highlighted a problem and illustrated goodwill by offering suggestions. The idea of prerecording isn't mine, and nor is rehearsing. I used to be a toastmaster, and the need for rehearsing speeches is key to the training offered. As for "one where the person who has the idea is willing to contribute time to making sure those ideas work," are you saying that, because I am unable to make the contributions you think I should that I cannot offer ideas?" How do you think that makes me feel? Do you have any idea at all about me? I thought not. -- John
John, I did not mean to offend you only to point out the tone of your email. If you'll recall, I indicated that I'm sure you didn't intend this to be offensive. In particular, "So I don't know what your videographers are doing, but they do need to sharpen up their act." I found this inflammatory, and they are not even "my videographers". That does not mean that your ideas are bad. I agree rehearsal is important. I agree that there are probably things that can be done to improve the video. I pointed out a concern of scale with regard to the ideas you seemed to be asking someone else to pursue, wanting you to understand why someone might not want to pursue them. Would you prefer that people remained silent under such circumstances and ignore your ideas, or would you like me to express the concern? I agree with Anthony, we all need to not come in with a thin skin when it comes to expressing ideas and listening to feedback, but hopefully that means you can take a little criticism and feedback as well. I probably would've never said the comment that your taking issue with if I hadn't felt called out for even making a criticism. You are right, I do not have any idea at all about you…… nor do I pretend to. Sorry to have offended you, It was not my intention. Dave On Apr 21, 2013, at 6:54 PM, John Summerfield <summer@js.id.au> wrote:
On 22/04/13 05:01, David Metzler wrote:
My own "analytical" thinking (intelligent or otherwise) suggests that as well intentioned as his ideas are, they do not look to "scale" to an event the size of Drupal CON, and should be tried out at a smaller event, preferably at one where the person who has the idea is willing to contribute time to making sure those ideas work.
Whether any of my ideas is practical in the context of DrupalCON or not, I have highlighted a problem and illustrated goodwill by offering suggestions.
The idea of prerecording isn't mine, and nor is rehearsing. I used to be a toastmaster, and the need for rehearsing speeches is key to the training offered.
As for "one where the person who has the idea is willing to contribute time to making sure those ideas work," are you saying that, because I am unable to make the contributions you think I should that I cannot offer ideas?" How do you think that makes me feel?
Do you have any idea at all about me? I thought not.
--
John
Ignoring the who didn't intend to offend whom part of this thread... Also, retitling. For the past several years, DrupalCon and a few other conferences I've been at don't have a videographer with a camera. They record the live output from the presenter's laptop on its way to the screen, give the presenter a microphone, and then just join the audio/video in recording. There's no one pointing a camera anywhere, it's just straight up recording of whatever comes out of the VGA port. That is, largely, for the sake of simplicity and cost. It's very simple and straightforward to do, and in recent years we've refined that process to the point that videos are often online same-day (where some other conferences may take months to get videos online). Some conferences do have a dedicated cameraman, or sometimes two (one for the screen, one for the presenter). I don't know what the additional cost/complexity is there, but it would no doubt take us a few tries to get right; definitely that's something that would need to be practiced at Camps first to work out the kinks. If you know a DrupalCamp organizer, I would very much encourage you to try and get them to experiment with such techniques. As far as video quality/resolution, I have no inside knowledge there. I don't know what goes on inside the magic video compiling machine. :-) I absolutely agree that presenters should practice, and the good ones do. However, the idea of effectively lip-synching a presentation I find quite repellant. I want to be able to read the audience, vary my presentation based on feedback, answer a question part way through if needed, use different jokes depending on which conference I'm at, etc. If I'm strictly following a script, I can't do that. And I'd probably just distract myself with words in my ear and get confused and lost anyway. :-) --Larry Garfield On 4/21/13 10:41 PM, David Metzler wrote:
John, I did not mean to offend you only to point out the tone of your email. If you'll recall, I indicated that I'm sure you didn't intend this to be offensive. In particular, "So I don't know what your videographers are doing, but they do need to sharpen up their act." I found this inflammatory, and they are not even "my videographers". That does not mean that your ideas are bad.
I agree rehearsal is important. I agree that there are probably things that can be done to improve the video. I pointed out a concern of scale with regard to the ideas you seemed to be asking someone else to pursue, wanting you to understand why someone might not want to pursue them. Would you prefer that people remained silent under such circumstances and ignore your ideas, or would you like me to express the concern?
I agree with Anthony, we all need to not come in with a thin skin when it comes to expressing ideas and listening to feedback, but hopefully that means you can take a little criticism and feedback as well. I probably would've never said the comment that your taking issue with if I hadn't felt called out for even making a criticism.
You are right, I do not have any idea at all about you…… nor do I pretend to.
Sorry to have offended you,
It was not my intention.
Dave
On Apr 21, 2013, at 6:54 PM, John Summerfield <summer@js.id.au> wrote:
On 22/04/13 05:01, David Metzler wrote:
My own "analytical" thinking (intelligent or otherwise) suggests that as well intentioned as his ideas are, they do not look to "scale" to an event the size of Drupal CON, and should be tried out at a smaller event, preferably at one where the person who has the idea is willing to contribute time to making sure those ideas work.
Whether any of my ideas is practical in the context of DrupalCON or not, I have highlighted a problem and illustrated goodwill by offering suggestions.
The idea of prerecording isn't mine, and nor is rehearsing. I used to be a toastmaster, and the need for rehearsing speeches is key to the training offered.
As for "one where the person who has the idea is willing to contribute time to making sure those ideas work," are you saying that, because I am unable to make the contributions you think I should that I cannot offer ideas?" How do you think that makes me feel?
Do you have any idea at all about me? I thought not.
--
John
FWIW, DrupalCamp Paris, just before the Dublin DDD in june, is supposed to have professional video capture. The cost is a few kEUr for two days of shooting in several rooms by a single cameraman, with some basic derushing before the video goes online. ________________________________________ De : development-bounces@drupal.org [development-bounces@drupal.org] de la part de Larry Garfield [larry@garfieldtech.com] Date d'envoi : mercredi 1 mai 2013 17:12 À : development@drupal.org Objet : [development] Presentation recording best practices [...] Some conferences do have a dedicated cameraman, or sometimes two (one for the screen, one for the presenter). I don't know what the additional cost/complexity is there, but it would no doubt take us a few tries to get right; definitely that's something that would need to be practiced at Camps first to work out the kinks. If you know a DrupalCamp organizer, I would very much encourage you to try and get [...]
There was an interesting development at Drupalcamp Florida. They hired a company who recorded all of the sessions. All of them. With a camera. http://drupaleasy.com/blogs/ultimike/2013/04/florida-drupalcamp-2013-session... They then said: we have enough money to actually post about 20 of the 50 or so sessions. If you (or your company) wants to "sponsor" your session to be posted, they can do so for a nominal fee and they get branding added to the video. Videos have not been posted, and it's been over a week. So maybe not so great on the turn around time :) The best presentation videos I've ever seen include two video feeds, the slides, and the presenter. Put the presenter in a tiny window off to the side and the slides in the main screen. Having worked in a Advertising Agency for the better part of 7 years before being hired by Commerce Guys, I have some experience in being hired to make video content. The expensive is not small, as it takes a lot of people, specialized equipment, physical hard drive space, very fast computers, and a turn around time of hours, not days. Not to mention someone who coordinates the files and gets the sessions posted with enough meta data that people can find them later. Josh On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 11:14 AM, fgm <fgm@osinet.fr> wrote:
FWIW, DrupalCamp Paris, just before the Dublin DDD in june, is supposed to have professional video capture.
The cost is a few kEUr for two days of shooting in several rooms by a single cameraman, with some basic derushing before the video goes online.
________________________________________ De : development-bounces@drupal.org [development-bounces@drupal.org] de la part de Larry Garfield [larry@garfieldtech.com] Date d'envoi : mercredi 1 mai 2013 17:12 À : development@drupal.org Objet : [development] Presentation recording best practices
[...] Some conferences do have a dedicated cameraman, or sometimes two (one for the screen, one for the presenter). I don't know what the additional cost/complexity is there, but it would no doubt take us a few tries to get right; definitely that's something that would need to be practiced at Camps first to work out the kinks. If you know a DrupalCamp organizer, I would very much encourage you to try and get [...]
DEVOXX has very good vids. Don't have any idea what it costs etc. http://www.parleys.com/channel/5148921d0364bc17fc56adf0/presentations Tony On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Josh Miller <josh@joshnliz.com> wrote:
There was an interesting development at Drupalcamp Florida. They hired a company who recorded all of the sessions. All of them. With a camera.
http://drupaleasy.com/blogs/ultimike/2013/04/florida-drupalcamp-2013-session...
They then said: we have enough money to actually post about 20 of the 50 or so sessions. If you (or your company) wants to "sponsor" your session to be posted, they can do so for a nominal fee and they get branding added to the video. Videos have not been posted, and it's been over a week. So maybe not so great on the turn around time :)
The best presentation videos I've ever seen include two video feeds, the slides, and the presenter. Put the presenter in a tiny window off to the side and the slides in the main screen.
Having worked in a Advertising Agency for the better part of 7 years before being hired by Commerce Guys, I have some experience in being hired to make video content. The expensive is not small, as it takes a lot of people, specialized equipment, physical hard drive space, very fast computers, and a turn around time of hours, not days. Not to mention someone who coordinates the files and gets the sessions posted with enough meta data that people can find them later.
Josh
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 11:14 AM, fgm <fgm@osinet.fr> wrote:
FWIW, DrupalCamp Paris, just before the Dublin DDD in june, is supposed to have professional video capture.
The cost is a few kEUr for two days of shooting in several rooms by a single cameraman, with some basic derushing before the video goes online.
________________________________________ De : development-bounces@drupal.org [development-bounces@drupal.org] de la part de Larry Garfield [larry@garfieldtech.com] Date d'envoi : mercredi 1 mai 2013 17:12 À : development@drupal.org Objet : [development] Presentation recording best practices
[...] Some conferences do have a dedicated cameraman, or sometimes two (one for the screen, one for the presenter). I don't know what the additional cost/complexity is there, but it would no doubt take us a few tries to get right; definitely that's something that would need to be practiced at Camps first to work out the kinks. If you know a DrupalCamp organizer, I would very much encourage you to try and get [...]
-- *Anthony Stefan Maciejowski* *www.Tony-Mac.com*
On 22/04/13 00:33, Anthony wrote:
I think, fwiw, John's remarks are constructive criticism. Why does everyone play the "emotional I am so offended card" when one expresses intelligent analytical thinking? This type of thinking can only help us not hurt us.
Thanks Anthony. The idea of using an MP3 player isn't mine, I believe thesnapchick made a video about it while ago. I spent an hour or two not finding it though. I have a clear recollection of her demonstrating how she placed her iphone and cables out of view, even for her video camera. As I said, prerecording the audio and "parroting" it might not be practical with a live audience. However, they already go to considerable expense and trouble to organise these events, organising decent (as compared with pretty awful) videos wouldn't add a lot to the cost, and there may be an argument to go to prospective sponsors for that part of the program. Or even some local tertiary students of videography would be interested. That aside, making the best videos one can is never a bad idea. Add it to your CV, it becomes one of your selling points. I have not yet made a video, but if I do, viewers won't wait for my slow laptop to do its thing, or for drush to spend 28 minutes enabling my selected modules or for Anaconda to spend two hours downloading stuff. I will edit those things out, and what is on the screen will be there just long enough for me to explain it or for you to get a feel for what is happening. -- John
participants (8)
-
Anthony -
Dave Metzler -
David Metzler
-
fgm -
John Summerfield -
Josh Miller -
Larry Garfield -
Nick Milicich