Why do the videos on Rand Paul's youtube channel look like crap?

[radiofriendly]

I know people who go and spend whatever on flat panel TVs, and occasionally they will play something that is not in the correct aspect ratio. They will sit there and watch it like nothing is wrong.

It dumbfounds me! With all of the technology we have more people are listening to music and watching stuff in the worst of possible ways! People listen to music from iphone speakers!

Rand's youtube page need not look like crap...

 

[heavenlyboy34]

This is not what a youtube video is supposed to look like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGtIu6_hrD4



This is what it is supposed to look like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rZRB32DF28




Why can't Rand's office figure out how to upload a youtube video properly? Just about every interview on Rand's channel is like this, with the reduced image size, big black borders in the viewable area, and low quality crappy resolution. Rand is a 2016 Republican frontrunner whose interviews probably get watched more than any other member of congress... he is a supposed master of social media who even has a snapchat account... but his staff hasn't noticed or doesn't care that his youtube videos are done completely wrong and look terrible?

Does anyone else agree this is a problem that should be fixed?

Why? Probably because he hasn't hired that amusing beaner Eduardo. Hire Eddy, Rand!! (yes, eddy asked me to post this comment via FB. )

 

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

I would guess that they have tuner card in a desktop computer using the QAM cable feed in the Capitol, so they only have access to most channels in SD; and therefore, in the case of most channels including MSNBC, letterboxed as well. Hence the windowboxing on the eventual youtube upload.

(And the aspect ratio is still 16:9, both windowboxed and fullscreen, BTW.)

 

[Mr.NoSmile]

I know that it seems like a mediocre kind of thing but presentation is very important. Remember when Kennedy won versus Nixon? Kennedy looked brilliant in black and white. He took the time to pay attention to the little things with regard to knowing how to visually present himself with what they were working with. Or, to be clear, the people whose job it was to think about and apply those things took the time to pay attention.

...yeah, except Kennedy and Nixon were shot in the same resolution. Kennedy just looked more presidential. And on television. Via radio, people thought Nixon won. There's not much of a comparison since that was who looked more presidential. This is just about what video looks better. And yes, it is mediocre. I honestly can't believe this is a thread.

 

[jct74]

I honestly can't believe this is a thread.

Well, Rand's youtube videos are viewed by a shitload of people. 8.4 million total views and 38.6 thousand subscribers to his channel, to be exact. Also, he is very likely going to be running for president, and trying to reach out to as many young people as possible, particularly through the use of social media. It would be good to not have someone making the same rookie mistake over and over again uploading his videos to millions of people. These video clips will also be used for future moneybomb or promotional videos.


Do you honestly not think it is at least somewhat of a problem that his videos look like this:

when with the simple change of a setting they should look something like this:

Gee, hardly a difference there.

 

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

The squishovision was probably done by WETA for their 4:3 480i subchannel. That can easily be compensated for on a TV with the "wide" or "zoom" function. Maybe not so easy for capturing video.

WIKIPEDIA:
Despite its positioning, digital subchannel 26.4 serves as WETA-TV's main programming feed. 26.4 is broadcast in standard definition and is the equivalent of the former analog channel 26. Therefore, channel 26.4 is the channel that is provided on the standard-definition tiers of local cable providers.[citation needed]

Digital channel 26.1 simulcasts any programming seen on the 26.4 subchannel that is available in high definition, as well as 26.4's entire primetime and overnight lineup regardless of whether the programming is broadcast in high or standard definition

 

[Fourteen]

Why can't Rand's office figure out how to upload a youtube video properly? Just about every interview on Rand's channel is like this, with the reduced image size, big black borders in the viewable area, and low quality crappy resolution. Rand is a 2016 Republican frontrunner whose interviews probably get watched more than any other member of congress... he is a supposed master of social media who even has a snapchat account... but his staff hasn't noticed or doesn't care that his youtube videos are done completely wrong and look terrible?

Does anyone else agree this is a problem that should be fixed?

You probably have a point. But perhaps once he declares his candidacy and assembles a campaign team, he'll be able to have more tech-savvy people running his channel? Maybe I'm wrong and I just don't know how these things work...

 

[MelissaWV]

Some problems are not that critical and vital to the overall success of a campaign, and this could arguably be one of those minor things. If that were all that went into evaluating whether a problem is addressed, it might not be a thread.

The other half of the story is how difficult something is to fix. If this is a one-click fix that would correct something viewed by so many, and pre-emptively prepare for when even more important videos are uploaded, then it's worth the effort.

 

[georgiaboy]

fix it, Randsquad.

 

[CPUd]

When Ron Paul had the rally in Tampa, they streamed it live via youtube. I was really impressed with the video quality and lack of bandwidth issues. I think maybe Collins was the one who set that up ??

 

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

someone making the same rookie mistake over and over again...

when with the simple change of a setting they should look something like this:

You're still not getting it. The source video is 4:3 SD. It's not a "rookie mistake" to upload in 4:3 SD when the source video itself is 4:3 SD.

 

[Ronin Truth]

Maybe he's just going after that down home Kentucky populist amateur look instead of the city slicker professional video treatment.

YEEE-HAW!

 

[New York For Paul]

You probably have a point. But perhaps once he declares his candidacy and assembles a campaign team, he'll be able to have more tech-savvy people running his channel? Maybe I'm wrong and I just don't know how these things work...

He already has a tech savvy team. If you check threads from 2008 and 20012 you might find there are many criticisms of the campaign. It is still many of the same people in charge or their friends. The great technical people left many years ago.

 

[jct74]

I would guess that they have tuner card in a desktop computer using the QAM cable feed in the Capitol, so they only have access to most channels in SD; and therefore, in the case of most channels including MSNBC, letterboxed as well. Hence the windowboxing on the eventual youtube upload.

(And the aspect ratio is still 16:9, both windowboxed and fullscreen, BTW.)

You're still not getting it. The source video is 4:3 SD. It's not a "rookie mistake" to upload in 4:3 SD when the source video itself is 4:3 SD.

It sounds like you are saying the problem is more complex than just having the correct aspect ratio setting. If that is the case though, why not just get the software or hardware that is needed? I understand Rand is trying to keep his office costs down and save taxpayer money, but how big of a cost would that be really? And if his technical people don't know exactly what is needed, why not just walk down the hallway to Bernie Sanders' office and ask them how their videos look so pristine?

Bernie's videos are in 16:9 by the way, not 4:3. So I would think the source video is not in 4:3.

 

[mad cow]

You're still not getting it. The source video is 4:3 SD. It's not a "rookie mistake" to upload in 4:3 SD when the source video itself is 4:3 SD.

I would think that 4:3 video sources would be right rare and actually hard to find these days these days when ~one billion smart phones,let alone video cameras,all record in 16:9.

 

[Jackie Moon]

The squishovision was probably done by WETA for their 4:3 480i subchannel. That can easily be compensated for on a TV with the "wide" or "zoom" function. Maybe not so easy for capturing video.

You're still not getting it. The source video is 4:3 SD. It's not a "rookie mistake" to upload in 4:3 SD when the source video itself is 4:3 SD.

I agree, that seems like it could be the problem.

Here's a picture of my TV when I turn on the SD version of CNN:

Looks like:

It's still the same 16:9 shape but on the SD channel it's shrunk down. As said, you can compensate on a TV by zooming in.

So I'd guess the problem is that Rand is capturing his video from the SD version instead of HD.