This post discusses the best way to encourage as many people as possible to share video files inside an intranet. We can discuss if that’s a good goal another time, let’s take it as a given.
So, what techniques can intranet managers use to encourage people to make ‘good videos’ (assuming we can define good)? What barriers do we have to deal with and what platforms do we have to sort out to get best business benefit from that effort?
Phew, A lot to cover, it’s no wonder I haven’t posted for months. To make up for it this will be a mammoth posting. Sorry about breaking my own rule about keeping these things short.
So… here’s what I think, though to be honest there’s a lot changing in this space…
Sigh, just when we’ve worked out how to write and organise text on the intranet along comes another challenge.
It was bad enough trying to get people to stop going overboard with eye candy graphics or at least write sensible alt attributes for them, then we encouraged user generated text contributions to blogs and wikis and had to re-examine how we encouraged ‘write for the web’ thinking. Encouraging ‘video creation for the web’ is going to be tough. We don’t really have an equivalent of Jakob Nielsen’s ‘write for the web‘ articles as a foundation.
Video in the intranet
No matter what kind of video is being produced, the golden rule should be ‘make it short’ and if you can’t do that, break it up into short bits. The reason for this is that video is a terrible format for indexing and searching, there are ways around this, but typically they aren’t used. A 40 minute video may be a good introduction to a topic and a viewer would start at the beginning and watch it all the way through if all the material was new to them. Otherwise they’ll want to skip about.
Imagine a few months after watching a video, a viewer wants to be reminded of a particular segment. It will be a pain to find the part they want. A collection of small, well labelled segments is much better. It’s also easy to associate searchable text with each segment.
Types of Video
I’ve broken these into three main types, though of course they can be mixed and you could probably find a few others such as stop motion puppets, computer graphics, etc.
By talking head I mean a shot of someone talking, it may be sitting at a desk or giving a lecture. There is a lot of skill required in recording someone: how to frame the shot, setting up the lighting, the angles you film with, when you should cut away, move the camera, etc. Generally all this stuff is called “Film Grammar“. Unfortunately, a lot of very skilled people have been working on cinematography for a long time. I say unfortunately because everyone is familiar with the work they’ve done – movies, or TV shows. We may not be able to say why the camera work is professional, but we all know what professional looks like.
And don’t be fooled by shaky camera phone clips on you tube to think that unprofessional video is acceptable, we all know if its film of a cat on a skateboard, or a monkey being tickled then its OK to look home made, An important message from a senior manager shouldn’t look like his/her kids were filming it by accident to send to You’ve Been Framed.
So if you are going to film people don’t try to be ambitious until you have a lot of skill. A short, single, static camera shot in a fairly informal setting might work. Any more than that and you should get some professional support. It’s generally not a good way of sharing a lot of knowledge but it’s nice to see folks.
(First pointless musical interlude)
Obvious to pick this track – it was one of my early favourites from the band, loved seeing them live too.
However this is about user generated video, if I’m suggesting that video of people is of limited use what else is there?
Screencasts are simply a user recording their computer, talking as they do so. It’s very cheap and easy to do – and it can contain very useful information – users of a particular system explaining its features to each other for instance.
The levels of professionalism can fairly low, people understand it is user to user and won’t mind the occasional umms and errs, Again the rule is keep it short and focus on specific defined topics. In my opinion screencasting is the great untapped resource for enterprises.
Live meeting / webex / gotomeeting recording.
I guess this is just a special type of screencast, though usually the recording is of someone running through a slidepack, rather than using a system. The production costs are minimal since the presentation was probably happening anyway. The quality might be ropey but that’s not too important. Again, to maximise the benefit and the long term use, splitting it up into topics and labelling them as such is a good practice.
Here’s is my advice, if you get invited to in a discussion about the best file format (codec) for creating and publishing video on the intranet, make your excuses and run away in the opposite direction. It’s not a decision that has a perfect answer and you’ll just get bogged down.
Flash Video is probably the best compromise – particularly for talking head video, but you’ll have to do a bit of work getting players embedded into other web platforms and most windows PCs in an enterprise can’t play those files from a desktop (though you can get players).
However some systems (such as live meeting) may not produce this format, and conversion from one format to another can drastically reduce the quality (which is a disaster for screencasts) Much as I hate to say it – (it’s a closed format with poor quality / portability), but Windows Media Video (wmv files) has the best support for creator tools and (typical enterprise) desktop viewer support.
In a few years time I hope the support for HTML5 and theora video makes this a no brainer. But we aren’t there yet.
End user tools
I mentioned creator tools. For video there’s such a range of hardware that’s its tricky to make any comments on standardisation. Whatever comes with the camera I guess.
For screencasts there are a few good free tools, might be tricky to get this past the IT department though.
For flash there is Wink its a nice easy to use tool that does good quality, it outputs to SWF so you’ll have some hosting problems and you might need a Shockwave player container for your CMS.
For AVI / WMV there is Camstudio which is a very simple way to make recordings, but setting up the codec is a pain, my advice is to record a temporary file at highest quality (minimum compression) settings and then process the files with a file processing program like virtualdub or mediacoder
There’s also a few online conversion tools like zamzar but it might not be suitable to send some of intranet content out past the firewall.
Microsoft labs have a screen recorder called Community Clips, it works very nicely with office applications, is a breeze to setup and use and produces OK (but not great) quality files of a reasonable size.
For editing or ‘post production’ most PCs have a copy of a thing called Movie Maker on them, often without a link in the menu, but it’s still there on XP and vista PCs (windows 7 won’t include it). It’s… well it’s rubbish to be honest, but it’s free and can be useful for splitting a file up into chunks.
The important thing here is that to encourage people to add video to your intranet they need the tools to do so. If there are restrictions on what software your people can use, the intranet manager needs to solve that problem and get the IT guys to allow these tools to be used. Professionals can write the business cases to get expensive video editing tools like Camtasia or Adobe Premiere, but this is for occasional, volunteer contributions.
(second pointless musical interlude)
I inculded that for no obvious reason, but I recently saw Dean from Luna do a show which I liked a lot.
How to publish video
Most readers will probably be wondering when I’m going to mention Youtube.
Youtube is a terrible model to emulate on an intranet and even if you emulate it you can’t sit back and expect your YouTube clone to change user behaviour or your company’s culture.
As place to dump files, a YouTube model is OK, but you will find it very difficult, if not impossible to get the critical mass of contributors or viewers this way.
The difference between You Tube in the outside world and a ‘YouTube alike’ in an intranet is that you want to share knowledge, not (just) entertain each other. If you’re bored you might go look around Youtube, and send your mates something funny you find, but you are unlikely to rummage around an internal one as most of the videos will not be all that interesting. The place you want to see a video is where you are actually doing your work, a video showing a feature on a system will work best the closer it is shown to that system. You can have a Youtube clone if you like, but don’t think of it as a destination, make sure it is open and the content on it can be repositioned and shared with the rest of the intranet. The key to success of video is getting it into your existing pages and systems. You might want to think about building video viewers for your CMS for instance.
Alternative publishing models.
I’ve been looking for alternative publishing models of user generated video that would support better business benefit. One style I think has a lot of merit is that on the mathtv.com site. This is lots of small useful clips, the site is extendable and maintainable, and people can find the exact thing they are looking for. I don’t much care for the actual style of the site, but with some tweaks it could turn out to be a platform for, say, a system’s FAQ / tutorial section. Teams using the system could add their own little tips.
I’d be really interested if anyone knows of other video based sites that have designs that would work better for intranet video, please leave a comment if you know of any.