Waching daily Apr 26 2018

So just to recap on this point. If you're going to use anybody else's content that's

not 100% yours, if you're going to do it without permission

you know, keep it under four seconds for sure but then also you want to think

about the will that you're creating, is a good will or is a bad will. If this

person whose content you're using we're to see your video and there's a good

chance they will, how are they going to feel about it? Are they going to feel like it's

validating them, that it's supporting them, it's making them look good and

bringing good things to them or are they going to feel a little bit ripped off?

Are they going to feel like you're taking something that they've worked hard to

create and you're taking it for yourself? So put yourself in their shoes, think

about it from their perspective. Chances are if you're bringing good

attention and good things to them they're going to be quite happy you know,

that you're using this. Even if you didn't have permission but if

you're just taking it for yourself, you're trying to you know, get views,

you're trying to make something off it and they get nothing in return then

there's a good chance that they will flip that switch to have your video shut

down and that's not going to lead to a good place for you. - So I do have to say here

maybe this is a great way to end this video, Grant. I remember sitting down with

you and realizing wait a second, your back-end YouTube creator studio looks a

little bit different than mine and as you've reached some higher levels

of success, you've got some options that my creator studio actually

doesn't have and I remember when you started showing me this like the actress

people are ripping me off all the time but look YouTube flats it they put in my

back-end and then I've got some options on what I can do. Do you want to just

share for a moment because I don't think some people understand what might happen

that if they want to just rip you off or take your stuff or copycat you and do

some of that, YouTube actually instead of them necessarily being the judge and

jury and executioner they actually give you as the Creator some options on what

you want to do with the content that these people have ripped off. - Yeah, that's

right, it was a huge issue for me where I was filing hundreds of copyright

complaints a day and having videos taken down almost became a full-time job just

to take down all the videos that were being stolen so at that level YouTube

gave me some options to manage my own account,

they give me a Content ID system which is basically an automated process that

uses an algorithm, it fingerprints my videos and then anybody who uses content

from any one of my videos, it matches those who - Check this out, this is so so

cool. When I saw it I was like, no way and it got me thinking okay, Kris,

make sure you always do things aboveboard because you don't want upset

anyone especially if they have this kind of power. What power do you have when the

algorithm says, hey, we've taken your fingerprint on your stuff, we've matched

it to theirs and what can you do? - Well the cool thing about this system is is

completely automated so any video that pops up that matches my content, I can

have it automatically process that however I want, I can even have I can

have the video taken down. - Which not YouTube doing it,

Grant doing it. - Yeah and if the video is taken down because of a copyright

issue, that could give the channel a copyright strike and if you get three

copyright strikes your channel is terminated so think about the risks

you're taking there. The other option is you can keep the video up but you can

take the monetization. - Just for a moment I was like, what beautiful irony, it's like

so these people like.. and they start making a pile of money with

it and you're like, yeah, we're just going to transfer their every penny of that every

day into my account. - Yeah, so theoretically you know, if somebody were

to take 10 or 15 seconds of my video and put it into their 10-minute video and

their video got 10 million views, you know, because my content idea has claimed

that video all the money for that monetization would actually float to me,

the creator would get none of it because they didn't get permission and it wasn't

authorized in advance so that's the risk that you take by using somebody else's

content if you're not getting permission upfront you're taking the risk that you

may get your channel terminated 3 strikes and you're out. You're taking

the risk that somebody else might take your monetization but you know, I think

the safest way to go is get permission, if you can't get permission, use as

little of the content as you can you know, if you can't make it original

yourself, use about 4 seconds or less and as far as the music goes, there's plenty

sites out there where you can get royalty free music you know,

audiojungle.net is one place where for about 20 dollars a track, you can get

some really great music. Actually there's a whole music library in YouTube. YouTube

has a whole music library, all of that's free, all that's royalty-free. If your

video gets featured on TV, you don't need any extra licenses, it's all included so..

- You know what I think about this whole trademark issue, I think years ago my

wife and I we travelled to the Holy Land, we went to Israel and one of the things

that we noticed is that we had all of these citizens that were just packing,

these big guns everywhere, they went on the street and and at first that made me

really nervous is like, that is so weird that people

in public carrying you know, these ak-47 you know, guns over their

shoulders. I'm like well, that's kind of crazy and I was talking to someone about

and said actually, we have one of the safest and most polite societies and

said, really then why is everyone carrying guns? They said, that's why it's

so polite because everyone's always packing heat, everyone always knows that

everyone's packing heat, it's actually a safety measure for the entire state of

israel and to why they do that, that's what allowed them to win their last war

because they had an immediate call to arms but what that does is it creates a

really polite society and you know, when you think of our copyright here, take

care of people, do right by people, give people credit where they should, bottom

line is, if you keep it above board, you're keeping it polite and you're

doing right by other people and that means at the end of the day, you get

taken care of too. - And if you have any other questions

about whether what you're doing is okay or not, you can look into fair use copyright

law. There are some circumstances where you can use people's videos without

their permission as long as it meets the fair use criteria but you do need to be

careful because if you abuse that privilege or if you're outside of it

that can become a legal issue, you can go to court, there can be attorneys fees and

a lot of stuff that you really don't want to get into so be say if you use a

hundred percent original content if you can, if you must use somebody else's

content, get permission to do it, if you're not willing to get permission

then just understand you're taking a risk and just use as little of it as

possible and then from there just goes downhill so we wouldn't advise you get

into that but hopefully that get some perspective puts it in a nutshell

and you can get on Google look for royalty-free providers out there there's

pond5 and there's also providers out there like epidemics sound where you

just pay a monthly subscription fee and then all the music that you want to use

is fine, lights for television and there's just no questions asked. - Oh we

love them we use them all the time, we got their subscription actually so we've

got unlimited you still using all of their tracks. - Yeah, so we may put a link

down in the description to where you can sign up for one of our affiliate links

but there's a lot of options out there for royalty free stuff you know, get

permission and get the licenses and you have nothing to fear. - Hey, friends. Thank

you so much for joining us here, thank you for watching this video. We want you

to know that we appreciate you. If you're not currently a subscriber and haven't

rung the bell, we can't notify you about the new video that we're going to be

sending you tomorrow so make sure that you subscribe, ring the bell so that we

can get you some more information and remember, above all,

when it comes to copyright, keep it above board.

For more infomation >> Can I Use Other People's Videos (PART 2) - Duration: 6:51.

-------------------------------------------

DBLWS Update Video: April 25, 2018 - Duration: 4:17.

Hello, my name is Marsha Drenth I am the program manager for the DeafBlind

Living Well Services Support Service Provider Program here at the

Center for Independent Living of Central Pennsylvania Today is April 26th

This video is to review and update on past events and to give next steps

On April 28th the House of Representatives Human Services Committee held a public hearing

to hear about House Bill 2069.

Five persons spoke in favor of House Bill 2069 including myself

Marsha Drenth, Zenola Tyson who is a deafblind consumer from

the Harrisburg area, Renee Fischer who is a support service provider

for the Pittsburgh area, David DeNotaris the Director of the Office

of Vocational Rehabilitation and Thomas Earl the director of the Liberty

Researchers for Independence in Philadelphia.

Comments were very well received and very positive

During the hearing several deafblind consumers went to meet with the representatives.

After the hearing a large group of deafblind consumers

support service providers and other persons from the community went to the capital cafeteria

to discuss what happened during the morning, to answer any questions and to talk about next steps

On April 18th the human services committee

had a voting committee meeting During this meeting, the committee members

decided to vote to amend the language

Now House Bill 2069 of 2018 printer number 3393

amends the language to change from Act 139 to the general appropriations funding

It also ensures that services continue for one year from July 1st of 2018 to June 30th of 2019

It also changes that it is now facilitates communication

DBLWS next steps are to number 1

change the language to now state statewide support service provider program for deafblind persons

And two, to contact the speaker of the house

and the house majority leader to encourage them to move the language into second consideration

The second consideration means that all representative have the opportunity to discuss and make changes if necessary.

This all need to takes place before the budget is decided on.

Also included will be talking points in case

you would like to contact your representatives If you have any questions about any information

that we have provided today, please let us know

Thank you

For more infomation >> DBLWS Update Video: April 25, 2018 - Duration: 4:17.

-------------------------------------------

How to Juggle "The Weave" - Beginner Juggling Tutorial - Duration: 6:47.

Hey everyone my name is Taylor Glenn

and today I want to teach you a juggling trick called "The Weave."

It looks like this.

All right, let's try that again.

Hey, everyone. My name is Taylor Glenn

and today I want to teach you a juggling trick called "The Weave".

It looks like this.

Now before we get started

I just wanted to say that if you find this tutorial helpful

make sure that you subscribe because I am going to be coming out

with a lot more tutorials in the future.

So you'll want to be updated on those.

Also I know some people just want to see a trick in slow motion

so that they can figure it out on their own.

And they don't want the step-by-step help of a tutorial.

So if that's more your speed

I've made a video of just this trick in slow motion.

There's a link in the description on that.

But if you're like me and you like the breakdown and the step-by-step, and the troubleshooting,

this tutorial is for you. So let's get started.

So the weave is not that hard of a trick

but you should probably have a good handle on these ones already...

The three ball cascade. Duh.

The 423 pattern.

And being comfortable enough with that that you can do

columns, or you know just generally be a weirdo.

Also keep in mind the weave does look a lot like Burke's Barrage but it's not the same trick.

So just make sure you're following each step

and getting each throw exactly how it's supposed to be thrown

before you move on to the next one.

But if you are stuck

and it is turning into Burke's Burrage and you can't figure it out

I am gonna have a part at the end where I talk about that and how to get out of that habit.

You can check that out.

Alright, let's look at the trick.

Underneath it all the weave is just a 423

with the 2s going up and around the 4s.

Nothing fancy, just 423 with weird 2s.

But I know that's easier said than done, so let's break it down.

Let's start with two balls.

With one ball throw it straight up

and as you do bring the other ball over the top and back underneath it.

You'll notice when the "4" or the green ball here is at its peak

the "2" or the red ball is already on its way back.

Don't forget to practice this on both sides.

Alright, let's add a third ball.

Start by doing the same two ball move you just did

but this time when the ball you threw comes down

throw the next ball from the same hand.

It should go on the inside of the ball coming down

and land in the other hand.

This is the "3" in the 423.

I'm not catching it in the other hand here.

I don't know why.

Um, I was being weird, but

you should get used to that feeling of the ball crossing.

So do that.

1

2

1

2. Good job.

When you feel good about that do the same thing,

but this time when that crossing ball is coming down

throw the next ball straight up on the inside.

This one doesn't change hands since it's a "4".

It's basically the same as that very first throw except on the other side.

1,

2,

3.

1,

2,

3.

You can see that the ball in my hand is already wanting to go around.

So complete the step by dragging that ball up and around the ball in the air.

Again, this is just like that very first step we did.

1,

2,

3.

1,

2,

3. Nice!

Finally when that last throw is coming down

throw the crossing ball back to the other hand.

Again, make sure it's on the inside.

1,

2,

3,

4.

1,

2,

3,

4.

From here it's just repeating it.

1, 2, 3, 4.

1, 2, 3, 4.

1, 2, 3, 4. You get the idea.

If you're still having trouble start back at step one

and take each step carefully.

And if you're still having trouble then

stay tuned till the end and I'll cover some troubleshooting.

But if you're feeling good about it let's focus on making it look pretty.

All right, so you've got to move down

but it's still looking kind of crappy.

What the heck?

My first tip is to turn the ball outward so we can see the ball.

If your hand is facing you it's covering the ball,

and that just doesn't look as good.

So turn it out and let us see it.

It's subtle but it helps.

The other thing you might be doing is dragging your "2"s around the "4"s really aggressively.

That's okay, but they should really be smooth and flowy.

They trace a figure eight like pattern and your wrist should be loose.

Practice that.

And if you want you can dance while you do it,

but maybe not in public.

It's not working! Arrrrrghhh

Okay, the first thing that might be happening

is you're hitting that ball coming up with your "2".

This is a common problem

and basically it just means that you're not moving that ball out fast enough.

Just pull it out before you throw the next ball.

That's really all it is.

One of the biggest issues I see is it somehow turns into Burke's Barrage,

and you just can't figure out why.

Part of that is muscle memory, and you really just need to break down each step more carefully.

But let's look at the differences.

Here you'll see Burke's Barrage and The Weave side by side.

They look pretty similar.

But the difference is with this "2" right...

Here.

With Burke's Barrage you'll push the ball inside the pattern

whereas with The Weave, you pull it on the outside.

Same thing on the side.

So if you keep going into Burke's Barrage

just remember to take that "2" and pull it on the outside

rather than pushing it through the middle.

Maybe you're still having trouble with it so let's look at the other big difference.

As I said earlier "The Weave" is just a basic 423 pattern.

Whereas in Burke's Barrage that "3" is thrown on the outside.

This is why Burke's Barrage feels a lot like Mills Mess

and The Weave does not.

Here they are side by side.

Watch the blue ball.

In Burke's Barrage that ball is going to be thrown on the outside of the ball coming down

whereas with The Weave it's going to be thrown on the inside.

So if you're still having trouble with your Weave turning into Burke's Barrage

Focus on THAT throw

and making sure that it goes on the inside of the pattern rather than being thrown from the outside.

Correcting this throw in addition to bringing that "2" on the outside

should fix the problem.

But if it doesn't just start from step one and take each step more carefully.

Alright, that is The Weave.

Hopefully this tutorial helped you out,

but if you do have any questions feel free to put them in the comments below

and I'll do my best to answer all of them.

And if you have any suggestions for other tricks you want to see me do it tutorial on

post those in the comments as well.

I want to know what tricks you want to learn.

And if this did help you learn the trick

post the video on Instagram and tag me at Taylor_Tries.

I would love to see the progress that you're all making.

That's it for now keep an eye out for future tutorials.

Hopefully this one helped you and I'll see you next time.

Go try stuff!

*terrible attempt by Taylor at humming a song*

For more infomation >> How to Juggle "The Weave" - Beginner Juggling Tutorial - Duration: 6:47.

-------------------------------------------

WATCH This Freaky Deepfake Video Of Obama Trashing Trump - Duration: 18:24.

WATCH This Freaky Deepfake Video Of Obama Trashing Trump

Barack Obama has finally ditched the slick politicking and come right out and said what

he really thinks about Donald Trump, Ben Carson, and who the real hero of "Black Panther"

is — and it's exactly what you thought he'd say.

Except that it's a "deepfake" by comedian Jordan Peele who wants you to know that we

live in dangerous times, where sinister, tech-savvy figures can create fake news with a few apps

and a couple of days of processing.

Here's the freaky and kind of funny deepfake video by Peele, in which Obama calls Trump

a "total and complete dipsh**," smacks Carson, and announces that "Killmonger was

right" about the need for black people to rise up and slay their oppressors, or something

(warning: language):

The video was published by BuzzFeed, which provides some more information on the new,

increasingly easy face- and voice-swapping technology that will further erode people's

trust in what they see online:

Technology to trick our eyes and ears is advancing rapidly.

Teams in Germany are working on Face2Face, the type of face- and voice-swapping technology

used to create the video above.

Software giant Adobe is creating a "Photoshop for audio" that makes it easy to edit and

manipulate what someone has said, as is a Montreal startup called Lyrebird.

After you've selectively edited someone's words, you could take that audio and use tech

developed at the University of Washington to generate a video of the very same person

speaking those words, just to make it fully convincing.

Peele used FakeApp, a free tool that people have used to retroactively make Nic Cage the

star of "Indiana Jones" and make celebrities the stars of porn videos.

BuzzFeed describes the process:

Part of the process for creating this video involved taking an original video of Barack

Obama and pasting Jordan Peele's mouth into it.

It looked really bad and clumsy at first.

But things got remarkably better the longer FakeApp was left to process a more believable

amalgamation of Obama's head and Peele's mouth.

That took roughly 56 hours and was overseen by a video effects professional.

So will deepfakes result in the "infocalypse" BuzzFeed and Peele are sounding the alarm

about?

Will the Russians fool large swaths of stupid Americans with fake videos of our political

leaders saying outrageous stuff to direct our politics?

Or, worse yet, will Nic Cage eventually star in every formerly good film ever made?

Stay tuned and stay skeptical.

For more infomation >> WATCH This Freaky Deepfake Video Of Obama Trashing Trump - Duration: 18:24.

-------------------------------------------

Tabaré Vázquez augura éxitos a Díaz-Canel - [VER DETALLES VIDEO] - Duration: 2:20.

For more infomation >> Tabaré Vázquez augura éxitos a Díaz-Canel - [VER DETALLES VIDEO] - Duration: 2:20.

-------------------------------------------

Demuxed - Ep. #9, 4K Video with Vimeo's Matt Fisher - Duration: 44:57.

Matt McClure: Hey everybody, welcome to Demuxed again.

I'm excited to say we have Phil finally back in the studio.

Phil Cluff: Back in the studio? I'm literally

in a different continent.

Matt: So yeah, huge thanks to Nick, obviously.

We'll have him back on because he's been fantastic.

But we're always glad to see your face,

even if it's via video screen.

Phil: I miss you, too.

Matt: So, Demuxed news. It's early in the year, obviously,

but we do officially have a location, as we've said,

and now we have dates. It's October 17th and 18th

at the Bespoke in Westfield.

And yes, you heard that correctly, that's two days.

So we'll look forward to seeing all

of your amazing submissions.

We're going to need more of them than ever

so we can make sure that we fill the schedule

and make use of all the time that we have.

Let's go ahead and dig in.

But today we have Matt Fisher from Vimeo.

Known Matt, I think, since I moved out to the Bay.

I think back then you worked at Twitch,

when we first met. But why don't you tell us

a little bit about yourself and why

you're the one to talk about 4K video today.

Matt Fisher: Yeah, well as was mentioned, my name's Matt Fisher.

I'm the Lead Video Playback Engineer at Vimeo.

I've been there for just over a year now,

I guess almost a year and a half.

And as you mentioned, I came from working at Twitch.

Why am I the guy to talk about 4K,

that's a great question.

Aside from the fact that at Vimeo

we definitely pride ourselves on high quality video,

it's something that

we try to enable

as much possibility around video delivery

and quality and good consumption

experiences for our creators.

Really understanding the current landscape

and where we're heading

is extremely important for us,

and it's something that I'm truly interested in.

Matt: I guess before we dig into 4K and 360 and VR

and all that sort of stuff, which we've talked

about very briefly on the show, or at least

one episode, right?

Yeah, light fields, which digs into VR a little bit.

But yeah, I guess let's talk a little bit

about HD's history online, or more generally,

just video quality online.

Phil: Video resolutions.

Matt: Yeah.

My favorite old-school online video example

is eBaum's World. Let's go from the beginning

of downloading DivX files from eBaum's World to today.

Yeah, let's talk about what that journey has been like.

Matt F:

I guess the real start would be,

especially when you look at it from today's perspective,

it seems so rudimentary, it seems so simplified.

But in all honesty, there's a lot of similarities

to what we do today still.

Video delivery is still relatively similar

to what it was. Maybe we took a big jump

from progressive to segmented delivery,

but at the end of the day, it's always just

constant iterations, constant upgrades.

Looking back that far, you're talking

back in the 360p, 240p days.

Steve Heffernan: Yeah, I remember.

Even in the late '90's you had Real Player.

And that was like,

1-something-p or something, but it was beautiful.

It was like videos playing in my web browser!

Matt: Wow!

Steve: Cutting-edge technology,

as Nick would say.

Phil: To be fair, your screen was probably 800 x 600.

Steve: Yeah!

Phil: Looks a lot better.

Steve: Exactly!

Matt F: I guess that's what it was, because when you go back

and look at any of that content now,

there's some great internet videos

that have stood the test of time

and you go back and look at them now

from the eBaum's World days.

You look at them now and you're wondering

how you even made out what was playing in the video

because it looks so bad.

And maybe it is just all relative to the screen size.

But at the end of the day, that wasn't too long ago, right?

Matt: No, not at all.

I wonder if that's part of the reason why,

what was the Flash site that was so popular?

- Newgrounds?

Matt: Newgrounds!

Newgrounds is what I was thinking about.

I wonder if the fact that it was just Flash cartoons

and the shittiness of the video.

It wasn't video, so it's fine. The quality looked fine.

Matt F: Well, it was all vector-based, too.

Matt: Right, exactly.

Matt F: So it scaled beautifully.

Matt: Yeah, I wonder if that has something

to do with that being more popular.

I'm going out on a limb here, but

I'm pretty sure that had more views.

Matt F: I never thought of it like that,

that's actually a great point.

Steve: You had Homestar Runner and Rascal.

Matt F: Which looked beautiful at the time, right?

Steve: Yeah!

Matt F: Especially when it was

displayed in its native vector format

through a Flash player.

Matt: Even Homestar is funny

because you go to the website now

and it's this tiny little square

at the top of your browser window.

And back then it was like, wow, this fit in my browser?

Do I have enough pixels to show this?

Even then, though,

I remember trying to watch videos on there

and those damn loader bars would take forever,

even on Homestar or whatever.

And then you start to have something like eBaum's World

and you're oftentimes either right clicking

a file and downloading it and watching it locally

or, if you're lucky, you have the browser plugin

that allows you to watch it in your actual browser.

But these things were slow.

I feel like it took a while for us to even get

to the point where we could reliably watch,

what is SD, technically?

Matt F: I would say anything

sub-720p.

Matt: Okay.

So there's no lower limit there?

Matt F: Yeah, I guess.

Steve: One by one.

Matt F: Go all the way down if you really want to.

Phil: That's really low definition, really SD.

Matt: Because I remember when I was legally

getting videos online occasionally in college,

one of my favorite resolutions was 576p.

Steve: Yeah, that's a thing.

I think that's native

DVD quality, didn't take quite as long to download,

legally, and it looked fine on my crappy 720p TV.

It was fine.

So at what point did we make this transition

into 720p feeling kind of standard?

Because at this point, if a video's not online,

and it isn't 720p, then are you even videoing?

Matt F: Going back to the brand of Vimeo,

this is why it was birthed in the first place.

Vimeo prided itself as supporting HD video

very early on, right out of the gate.

It's crazy to think that this

was only years ago, not decades ago.

Steve: It was probably 2006, 2007?

I remember there was whole slew of companies

that wanted to be the HD YouTube.

I could probably name 50 at one point

around 2007, 2008.

Matt F: Absolutely.

Steve: And then Vimeo really owned that space,

YouTube eventually brought out HD,

but there was definitely a wave there

of people jumping on board like, yeah, HD's the thing.

Matt F: And it's similar to the landscape we have today,

where you have the battle of, just because

there's a user-generated content platform

to deliver this content, you still need people

to create it. You still need people to generate

the content and put it up there for consumption.

And then on top of that you need to be able to consume it.

So whether that means having hardware capabilities

or internet capabilities as a bottleneck to overcome,

that's just more and more variability.

I think when you compare and contrast it

to today's ecosystem, there's a lot of similarities.

Matt: Let's talk about 4K.

I think most online service providers

would cap out at 1080p.

I don't think I've seen anything higher than 1080p,

and you're lucky if you get that online today.

I feel like most HD, if you're clicking HD

you're getting 720p, maybe you're getting 1080p.

Steve: You even have the phone plans now,

they define SD as 480p and under.

And they'll try and cap you.

It's based on bit rate but they'll try

and cap you at the resolution sizes

that 480p is SD and 720p is HD

and I think they don't let you go above that.

If you're on one of these unlimited plans

where you can turn on the smart video capping

or whatever, then yeah.

Matt: In air quotes, "unlimited".

Steve: Yeah, exactly.

Matt F: I'm curious as to

how big of an issue that could potentially present

down the road, where we're not really

decoupling bit rate from resolution.

And as we strive to lower bit rates

and increase resolutions, how that manifests itself

from especially a cell phone plan concept.

Phil: I actually found in testing something the other day,

a British internet service provider

that was man-in-the-middling HLS manifests

and stripping out higher bit rates.

Steve: No way!

Phil: I'm not going to name

and shame, but it's out there.

Steve: Would SSL help there?

If you're an internet service provider today

and you want to actually deliver HD...

Phil: Yeah, this is essentially

how we found it. We found it because we realized

manifest was not behaving the same way

over TLS as it was over Clear.

Steve: Wow.

Phil: Yeah.

Matt: So, we've gotten to 720p, 1080p.

Some people can see it, some people can't.

Where does 4K fall into that,

in terms of the support spectrum today?

What is 4K in your mind, watchable 4K?

Reasonably today, if a website says, "we support 4K",

at what point do you say "bullshit",

and what point do you say, "yeah, that's legit"?

Matt F: Again, I think you have to really

look at it from two perspectives.

There's the bit rate and then there's the resolution.

Anybody can deliver a 4K resolution

with very low bit rate and I don't think

the viewing experience would benefit from it whatsoever.

The landscape as it exists today is a wide spectrum

but narrow usage, I would say.

Again going back to the idea that when you look at it

from just the 1080p perspective,

and when 1080p first came out.

It wasn't too long ago when having a 1080p TV

was all the rage. It was a big deal

to jump up even from 720p to 1080p, in my opinion, at least.

And then the down-scaling factor came in as well

when you had 1080p content being down-scaled

to the 720p display, it looked alright as well.

So the landscape today in terms of content is growing,

and I think 4K is still in its relative infancy.

Once you start seeing more and more content

down to the handheld devices, cell phone devices

start really pushing more and more 4K video,

that really helps drive a lot of the ecosystem as well.

But it's end-to-end, it's about the creators

and it's about the consumers.

So without easy access to 4K televisions

and an internet service provider that can provide you

with enough down to support 4K,

and I'm talking, let's say, 30+ megabit downloads

just for that one video, without all those pieces

to the equation, I don't think it

can ever necessarily be solved across the board.

But that being said, I think the spectrum,

as I've mentioned, just keeps getting wider.

There's people that couldn't download 1080p today

in some parts of the world, they're going

to have trouble doing that.

They'll probably favor a 720p or even 540p stream.

But there's 2K video out there right now

and there's a fair amount of it.

There's 4K video out there now

and there's growing numbers of that as well.

From an engineer's perspective, it creates more challenges.

I think delivery and smart delivery

is going to be a challenge that increases over time,

especially with the landscape we're in right now.

We've only really been talking about television screens

and computer screens from this perspective, too.

So we can even just start scraping the surface

with the idea of VR and spherical video

and things like that, where I think the conversation

completely stems off into a new direction.

But I think it only continues to validate the need

for these high resolutions over time.

Matt: Let's talk about why

you think this is necessary, and do you think

it's necessary in 2018?

Earlier, before we started recording,

we were talking about why this is needed.

When you say that, do you think this is needed

in terms of, as an industry we need

to be thinking about this for next year,

or is 4K just a gimmick at NAB and IBC in 2017, 2018,

and it's not something that we

should really care about for consumers?

Or do you think this is something

that we need to start worrying about now?

Or do you think is is something

that we need to start worrying about in 2020?

Do you see what I'm saying?

Matt F: Oh absolutely, yeah.

I think it's not a deadline-driven investment.

From our perspective and a lot of,

and I say people working in the video industry,

and even from a consumer's perspective,

I wouldn't say there's any deadline.

There's no prioritization around it.

If it's accessible and it's not expensive,

people will flock to it, I don't see why they wouldn't.

But I think we're reaching a new realm

where you're going to have those people

that will continually argue that having

a 60-inch display, which is a relatively large display

even in today's standards, you're not going

to see any benefit between 4K and 8K,

just from a perception perspective.

And the argument that anything about 4K

requires an 80-inch display, I think looking at it

in that perspective is a little bit narrow-minded.

There's a lot of areas, as we've just mentioned,

like the whole VR tier that I think

that's a huge conversation to have

in terms of putting validity behind any of this.

Steve: Just talking about VR as higher resolution itself,

because it's essentially just a bigger video.

Matt F: Right, I don't think

anybody in today's landscape is having

absolute jaw-drop factors with spherical video.

I think spherical video is great,

I think it's a step in a very cool direction.

Whenever I look at spherical video and VR

integrations with video, I think

just from an educational perspective.

I couldn't imagine how cool it would be to be in school

and have VR integrated into the classroom

or something like that.

But there's a lot of other use cases

that I think a lot of people ignore,

thinking from a content creator's perspective,

just because they're filming in 8K

doesn't mean they necessarily want people

to consume it in 8K.

They can be down-sampled or cropped and edited,

which is, I think, a huge benefit

from a creator's perspective.

To be able to film in 8K and not even

have to pan the camera but be able

to do that in post, I think is very enabling

for editors and directors and content creators.

Steve: How interesting. So they could crop down

into the frame, so they have a much wider resolution

so they can move the camera around

within that wider frame.

Matt F: Absolutely.

Steve: That's interesting.

Matt F: Right.

The idea of having more ability to do things in post

and keep things as high quality as you expected,

I think that's very cool.

And again, an area of interest a lot of people

don't necessarily think about

when they're on the consumption side of the equation.

Phil: It's one of those things that suddenly came up

when we talked weeks ago about light field cameras as well,

making a lot more decisions in post rather than

it really being about high resolution immediately.

It's more about giving the directors and producers

and the editors more decisions later

down the production chain, and I think

we get the same thing here.

Matt F:

But I think the next step past that is, okay,

I have a film that I'm working on and it's shot in 8K.

That's fine, we're probably going to release it

at a 4K max or even a 1080p video online.

There's still the question about shareability factor

of that content during its creation,

and the feasibility of using online tools to do that.

If I had a 4-plus-K video and put it online

for my team to all view and put notes on

and play back on their home televisions

to do test views of it and such,

why shouldn't we enable that?

Why should the rule be that, oh,

it's not worthwhile for the grand audience,

so you're just going to have to plug in a hard drive

or figure out some kind of high-capacity vast solution

for storing your content and playing it back

on devices for your unique use case.

From our perspective, I think it would be

a little ignorant not to pay attention to it

and not to give it the interest that it deserves.

But I think the big unanswered question

that everybody would ask is, when does it become a reality?

And I think that's a tough question to answer.

I think the only concrete date or time

or expectation I've really seen around it

is the 2020 Olympics in Tokyo,

which will be broadcast in 8K.

Steve: Whoa, really?

Matt F: Now, who can consume that outside of Japan?

Because at the end of the day, the Japanese

are really leading the way and they have for quite a while.

But the NHK has done some really cool stuff

and research and they're always

ahead of the curve around this and I think

what they're doing, especially around

their involvement with the 2020 Olympics,

or so it seems up to this point,

will really help solidify the need for this.

And where the need is more evident,

I think we'll find out as we travel down that road.

Phil: It's interesting because the first demo I saw of 4K

was Olympics content when I was working at BBC

and we actually had NHK come over

and demo a load of the stuff that they were doing for it.

It's going down a load of BBC backbones,

experimental for the time of 2012 Olympics,

so it's not surprising but we can make sense,

I guess, of their pushing the 8K agenda for the next one.

Matt: When we talk about accessing,

maybe you could tell us from Vimeo's perspective,

when you're looking at user data for watching content,

what we've heard, for example, from folks at YouTube

is that surprisingly enough, people will

actually select a higher bandwidth

and then be okay with just waiting for that to load.

They're okay with a much longer startup time,

but they'd rather see the higher bit rate

even if it takes them longer to get there.

With Vimeo's perception as being high quality,

I would assume that people would do the same thing,

especially if you're watching art house

on there or something like that y

ou're not going to want to watch at 240p.

I assume you guys are already seeing this in some way

play out in your data.

Matt F: It's funny

you mention that in relation to initially speaking

about eBaum's World. Because I think that mentality

of the "play, pause, walk away, come back in 15 minutes

to watch your content", that's a very archaic

way of looking at things.

I think

it's reminiscent of progressive delivery,

where you're going to download the file

from start to finish either way.

If you kick off the download,

you know that the more time you wait,

the more you're going to be able

to consume when you come back.

That's not necessarily the case in today's world.

You could easily start a video and the buffering

algorithm within the playback mechanism

is going to allocate the buffer it sees adequate

to allow you to start playing back the video

and hopefully not rebuffer down the line,

but might not allow you to allocate any more buffer

than is configured in that mechanism.

So I don't know, when I look at the idea

of people play-pausing, walking away, and then coming back,

it's very circumstantial whether that's

actually going to benefit them or not.

But to that point, I think if I was to point a finger

at a demographic that would favor

that behavior more than others, it would be

less of the casual consumers and more

of the professional consumers.

People that, again, are working with creators

or giving feedback to creators

or have a reason to kill that time to watch content.

Generally speaking, I think a lot of the use cases

of people discovering content and playing it back,

they still really want that start time

to be as minimal as possible.

And it goes many ways, but again,

I think the main point I'm trying to make

is that it's a funny mentality to have

and I think it is really based off

of people's experience playing back progressive content,

not segmented content.

Steve: Yeah.

You touched on something there where

there's a lot of user expectations built into this.

That's going to be a major driver, I think,

of adoption of these formats.

One of the things that we've heard,

and maybe you guys have experienced this,

when you increase the video resolution

for the general audience, most people don't notice.

That's not going to have a huge impact

on your watch time, right?

But if you then brought it back down,

that's when you'll see the impact.

People will get used to the higher-quality resolution

and not like the lower resolution and start to complain.

So I think that's really interesting,

it almost means that whoever gets there first

is going to be pushing everybody else

to be upgrading their resolution.

For instance, if Vimeo or YouTube started doing 4K

as a norm, and assuming that there were devices

that supported it, it would start to become

the user expectation and start to pull

everybody else to do the same.

And these consumers would go to other websites

and say, "Oh, the video here is crap."

Matt F: I think that brings us back to that topic

of really understanding how bit rate impacts resolution.

Because again, it's one thing to

encode or transcode to 4K, but if you

don't have the bit rate to back it up,

it's going to be heavily dependent

on the content you're viewing

as to how good it actually looks.

I think people will always strive

for more clear, beautiful looking video

with the best quality of experience they can possibly have.

Unfortunately, that's not always feasible,

and I think that spectrum of ability,

I guess you could say, to play back

and consume content continues to grow.

And I think that's one of the interesting parts

of this continual evolution down the line

of higher, higher resolutions, more bits

being shoved down the pipe, whether the ISP

or connection can handle it or not.

The demand will continue to grow.

Unfortunately, the ecosystem isn't growing

at the same pace as the demand,

and when you look at it from a worldwide perspective,

having the ability to have 10 megabit download speed

across the entire plant is still a dream.

That's a pretty crazy realization to have

when you start talking about delivering video content

that could be well over 50 megabits per second.

Phil: When we talk about the ability to consume

and the desire for content, where are we now

in terms of hardware support?

I'm sure I read a stat somewhere that said

15%, 20% of TVs that are being sold now

are UHD, airquote, "ready," 4K ready.

Where are we, realistically?

The mobile market is getting there,

but there's not that much that's anywhere close.

What was the feeling at CES this year?

Matt F: I think the 8K was generally a big talking point

at CES this year. But again, whether that's the hype train

rolling along and keeping people aware

that these hardware manufacturers are in this space

and they are thinking forward is very reassuring.

But whether or not that is something

that you'll see in your living room next year

I think is pretty doubtful.

You mentioned cell phones as well,

which I think is another thing to consider

because when you look at the lifespan

of the average consumer cell phone

as opposed to the lifespan of the same person's television,

they're dramatically different.

We're on 6-12 month cell phone lifespans now

for a lot of people, and people

don't do that with their televisions.

There's probably still a lot of people

that are comfortable getting home from work

and watching Netflix on their 1080p,

40-some-inch television and it works completely fine.

And there's no real need, until the price drops

so much that you need a new TV anyways

and the de facto solution is just a 4K display.

I think that is a major driver in terms

of when creators are considering

how they want to deliver their content

or how businesses want to deliver content,

whether it's worthwhile.

So you have these cell phone screens that are beautiful

and they're getting better and better,

but in terms of pixel density, how far do you go

before it's just not worthwhile

because of the size of the device?

Steve: When you're talking about a phone,

there's got to be a max.

We're talking, Apple sells retina displays...

Matt F: Retina displays look beautiful until you put

a magnifying lens in front of it

and put the screen two inches away from your face

in a VR headset, and then all of a sudden

you can start noticing pixels again.

As we continue all these new mediums

for playback, the equation grows,

and I think the considerations increase.

The idea of having 8K on a 60-plus inch television screen,

when you pull that into the mobile perspective,

it doesn't necessarily make sense.

Does it make more sense in some other playback mechanisms

than others, well if it's VR as opposed

to just watching a YouTube or Vimeo video

right on your handset in your hand, I think it does.

Does it mean that you deliver some types of video

for some playback options as opposed to others? Maybe.

But I still think when you think about the whole landscape,

there are areas that have a higher priority

or a higher validity of use around

some of these resolutions.

Phil: It's super interesting

because obviously, Netflix's post-production guidelines

say for an original, you have to deliver it in 4K.

You can't deliver it in anything under 4K.

I think the minimum bit rate is like 240 megabits as well

for what you're delivering into Netflix,

regardless of whether they actually choose

to deliver it at that sort of resolution.

If you're shooting a Netflix original,

you'd better be shooting it at 4K.

Matt F: Right, and it makes sense when you think about it.

They're pushing a lot of 4K content.

And especially around their originals,

when you talk about uniformity

and expectations around playback quality,

if you're watching one Netflix original tonight

and it looked gorgeous, and then you watch

another one tomorrow that's a Netflix original as well,

but of lesser quality, maybe it's noticeable,

maybe it's not, that's a great question.

But creating some uniformity behind it

I think would remove a lot of potential bad feedback.

Phil: If it's Netflix content, all I know

is it's going to be really grainy.

Every original is grainy.

I don't want film grain, I know you didn't shoot it on film!

Matt: So far we've been talking about this

largely from the perspective of the consumer,

what the consumer wants, what the hardware can support.

Everybody in front of a microphone right now

is more on the delivery side of that equation,

basically making this stuff play back in a web browser

or in some other sort of online delivery way.

A lot of this is already giving me

a little bit of heartburn. So yeah,

for people in our industry, why are people

going to hate this, aside from just massive CDN bills

and chucking the shit around internally in your pipelines.

Why are people going to hate it,

and are people going to not hate it enough?

It's the customer love and our hate,

at what point does that cross each other?

Matt F: That's a great question.

I guess it depends how deep your pockets are.

But I think something to consider to that point is,

as you increase the resolution or your highest profile

available, let's say, generally it's not just that.

The transcode ladder is going to increase

in the steps to get there.

Going from 1080p to 4K, if you're working

on a good bit rate like a good AVR strategy,

generally you don't want to make jumps from 1080p to 4K.

That's going to be a pretty annoying

viewing experience, if even possible.

The circumstances to jump from 1080p to 4K

directly back and forth would be very unique.

But nevertheless, if you're going to deliver 4K content,

you would want the profiles to follow suit.

So that would mean 1080p, 2K, maybe 5K, 6K, 8K,

which dramatically increases transcode times,

the amount of effort that needs to go

into just getting the video into a format

that can be delivered over the web.

Then you have to deal with all the storage costs

of storing all of that video, and then the delivery costs.

I think the bulk of the concern from the platforms

that are delivering this is more

from a transcode perspective, because it depends

on how many people are watching it.

It's all relative to how much

you're going to actually pay for it

to how much you're delivering it.

If you're transcoding everything and only

a small fraction of your consumers

are watching the highest profile,

I think that's the big consideration to make.

But at the end of the day, this is all doable now.

It's just circumstantial as to if it fits the model

at whatever you're working with

and whatever you want to deliver,

and how you want to deliver it

and who you're delivering it to.

Phil: This all feeds into next-gen codecs.

Because if you're a Netflix subscriber,

you only get UHD, 4K content over HEVC.

They don't deliver it any other way, there is no H264.

And in my mind, I don't see anyone delivering 8K.

Do we really think people are going

to deliver 8K over the internet in HEVC?

Or is it something that's going to be

something we don't realistically see

until we've got AV1 out there and actually

get some gains from that?

Matt F: Yeah, whether that's

a physical blocker, it's not.

It's not an absolute blocker because

we can accomplish 8K video with HEVC right now.

Whether that's the best solution

and whether that drives it into a much higher

saturation point amongst the industry

and consumers and creators, that's a good point.

Again, I think the high priority ticket there

in that question is the ISPs and what people

can actually obtain in terms of bandwidth to their house.

Again, looking at it from a worldwide perspective,

and 10 megabits is the dream for everybody,

then somebody else can have fiber to their door.

So it's a very, very large playing field to consider.

I think it's going to continue to grow.

Whether HEVC will get us there and get us

to a saturation point that maybe what 4K or 1080p is now,

I wouldn't want to bet either way,

but I see it being a kicker, but maybe not the receiver

that's going to take us all the way into the end zone.

You know what I mean?

Phil: Do you ever feel what sort of bit rate

we need to be talking about the HEVC 8K

to be meaningfully pretty on, say, 65-, 70-inch display?

Matt F: I don't really like to think of that

in the CBR mentality, more like the VBR mentality.

I think the range is, I'm sure everybody

has their own opinions on this.

I would say anything above 50 megabits

is good-looking 8K, it's circumstantial

depending on what the video is.

If we're talking something that has beautiful,

sharp edges or a lot of colors or a lot of movement,

that's going to change. But you can get away

with relatively good looking 8K at sub-50 megabit.

Whether that is what we'll consider a standard,

I don't know. I think right now

anything below 50 megabits on an 8K video

is just getting us to 8K in the environment we're in now.

If you had the feasibility to up the bit rate,

I think everybody would take it if they could.

Phil: So does that mean we need to start thinking

about a new physical medium?

Blu-ray's got us a long way.

Blu-ray surprisingly got us to ultra high-def

4K UHD delivery. Do we think Blu-ray,

even the high-storage Blu-rays, are going to get us anywhere

with 8K? Or are we getting towards the end

of physical media at all in that format?

Matt: Wow, interesting.

Matt F: Yeah,

that is a great question.

Steve: We need a Blu-ray

the size of a LaserDisc.

Matt: You heard it here first, online delivery is dead.

Matt F: Yeah, that's a great question though.

As somebody that doesn't have a DVD player

or a Blu-ray player in my house,

I wouldn't be sad to not see that come to fruition.

But that's not fair, that's not a fair way to look at that.

Going back to the fact that the majority

of the world can't have an internet connection

that can deal with 2K video, I think that's a valid concern.

Whether that manifests itself in a completely new medium

or not, I think is the real question.

I don't think we're ready for a new medium.

I think the concept of digital storage for video

has ran its course. I knock on wood,

I could be completely wrong in saying this.

But if you have the capability on your internet connection

to be able to download that quality of video,

then I think you've pulled yourself out of that race.

So as that group size continues to get smaller

and smaller, is it worthwhile for manufacturers

to even create new devices, knowing that they're going

to have a shorter lifespan than

what would be considered that of a DVD player?

Great question, I wish I had more insight into that

but I'm the type of person that

is out of that game completely.

Steve: Yeah, I feel like today it's a hard drive.

How often do you want a physical device

that can only store one movie?

Matt F: Right.

Yeah, you would think that if we evolved

into a new medium, we would just have solid state drives

in our pockets and use that.

You'd go up to rent a solid state drive.

Steve: Redbox.

Matt F: Right.

Phil: It's really interesting for me

because I thought this and then I bought

ultra high-def Blu-ray and I actually

ended up having to buy the player to go with it,

which actually ended up being an Xbox One.

But I was blown away by how much better it was

than Netflix's 4K, I really was.

Because I realized the bit rates for the dual layer

is like 82-108 megabit, that's a lot of data

when you talk about HEVC as well.

I was blown away by how good it looked in comparison.

I actually tried to find a movie that was out

on ultra high-def Blu-ray and on one

of the streaming services in UHD

so I could back-to-back them and have strong opinions,

but couldn't find any, annoyingly.

Matt: Question is, can you get Altered Carbon

on DVD from Netflix's DVD service?

Phil: That show's pretty violent.

That surprised me.

I wasn't expecting it.

Matt: Quite enjoying it so far.

Matt F: I am really enjoying it.

Matt: That show in particular plays well into the next question

of, how does HDR play into all of this?

When we talk about 4K, HDR is the other word

that's thrown around a lot in terms of new advancements

and high quality viewing experiences.

So, what is the relationship between 4K

and HDR in your mind?

Matt F: In terms of HDR

increasing the color gamut and actually seeing more colors

in video content, effectively, I think

it's a super important change that is going

to be slower to manifest itself than I would like to see.

In terms of its relationship to resolution,

I've always been of the mindset

that they're pretty independent from one another.

I

think a lot of the comparisons are just being made

in relation to resolution because of the time

we're at right now, the move from H264

into the H265 realm, the support for it

at a higher quality, but also on devices that support it,

which are of higher quality now.

So I think all the pieces are just falling

onto the same table at the same time,

and I think a lot of those relationships

or thoughts around how the two are related

are just more circumstantial than anything.

Nevertheless, as excited as I am about

higher resolution, especially on different mediums

and different platforms, I'm just as excited for HDR.

I think once you start consuming actual HDR content,

especially on a big, beautiful screen,

you realize how awesome it actually is.

And how that represents itself with different

types of content, like sports, would be awesome,

more and more movies, feature films and such.

It will really help benefit the landscape.

Coupled with high resolution, coupled with areas

like virtual reality, I think

only make it better and better.

Especially in virtual reality if you're watching 360 video.

The more it hurts my eyes to look at the sun in a video,

the better, in my opinion.

Pulling yourself into the virtual reality landscape

that anything we can do to trick your mind,

to keep you tricked for a longer period of time,

creates a better experience.

Doing that with games and such and full motion capture,

I think is much easier to accomplish

than just a 360 video with a fixed camera position,

or at least what we're used to with 360 content right now.

So removing the screen door effect

with increasing the size of the video,

the resolution of the video, the bit rate of the video,

the color spectrum of the video,

I think all gets us closer to a world

where that false reality can continue

to trick your mind longer than, say,

just watching a general 360 video

where you can see the stitching

and you can see the blurriness

and you can't see things far away.

Related, but I think coincidentally related, in my opinion.

Matt: Got it.

Phil: I think a lot of people

would say that 1080p high dynamic range content

looks better than 4K, especially when you think

about on a screen, if you've got some bandwidth to spare

but not enough to get a full UHD 4K stream down the pipe,

a lot of people are going to get much more benefit,

visually, from picking up a 1080p stream.

Matt F: Sure, yeah, can't argue with that.

And on top of that, I think watching a 1080p

that was down-sampled from 4K content looks even better.

Phil: Oh yeah, oh yeah.

Matt F: Again, going back

to the argument that from a creator's perspective

I think there's more validity behind super high resolutions

now, especially in the online ecosystem,

than the consumers, because of all of the hurdles

that a consumer has to jump over just to get it,

if they can even find the content.

From a creator's perspective,

the amount of doors you open by overshooting

or down-sampling that content are monumental.

That can be a huge win.

But I'm looking at this as somebody

who's not necessarily a creator,

and looking at it as a fly on the wall.

In my opinion it would be a much better circumstance

to be in, to have overshot things and to have

more options in the editing room.

Steve: How long until I can shoot 4K on my phone, do you think?

Matt F: It depends what kind of 4K, again.

I'm sure a lot of phones have sensors

that can shoot nice 4K video, whether that's

a high bit rate, whether it has the frames per second

that shooting sub-30 FPS 4K as opposed to 60 FPS 4K,

at what bit rate, yeah, I don't think

that world is far off at all.

I think that world's coming to fruition already.

Again, you ask yourself how does that manifest itself

when you go and look at just point and shoot content?

Maybe the realm of very jittery content

that is shot on 4K, does that open up a realm

that allows video stabilization algorithms to work better?

They have a lot more room for correction,

so that sure, you're still overshooting on your phone,

but everything is going to come out

looking like it was shot on a dolly.

That would be great if you had the option.

So from a creator's perspective,

I think the option increase is great.

Then the big question is, do you use the internet

to facilitate a mechanism to allow creators

to share and create and modify and collaborate online

around this content in its native form?

Or do you just go ahead and run a transcode

over that raw content so it can be dealt with online

and then brought back almost verbally

to an editor who's dealing with the raw,

just that back and forth seems a little ludicrous.

It might be circumstantial in terms

of how people are set up today, but in a perfect world,

I think if you can facilitate all this

over the internet, it would be the best case.

I think this goes back to, why bother

having a new hard physical medium for video

past Blu-ray now, when and if you can facilitate

plus-4K content over the internet?

Matt: Cool. Well, we're coming up on time.

So I would like to say that I think the end goal

that we've come to here is that we know

we've made it once we need to wear eclipse sunglasses

when we watch content on a television, right?

Matt F: That would be amazing, yeah.

We'll all have welder's masks on our desks

so we can have some longevity in our profession.

Matt: Perfect.

Matt F: There's a million-dollar idea for you right now.

Matt: I think that's also a million-dollar

attack vector for the nation.

Thank you so much for joining, Matt.

This has been awesome.

Matt F: I appreciate it,

it was great to be here.

For more infomation >> Demuxed - Ep. #9, 4K Video with Vimeo's Matt Fisher - Duration: 44:57.

-------------------------------------------

Tackvideo! Thank you video! ENG SUB - Duration: 1:42.

Hi everyone!

This is my first video ever

and I thought to myself, I can´t look like this

but, this is what I look like

99% of the time.

Most of the time, at home with no make-up on, in bed.

So I better just be honest right from the start.

I would just like to thank each and everyone of you who donated money to my fund,

and who supports me in this

making this possible in only three weeks

getting all the money for the program.

I have now paid for it and I have started looking into the first module out of eight.

So, thank you thank you thank you, so much

I´m so happy that you want to help me with this, it means the world to me.

To feel that love and consideration.

So thank you, and a big hug to you!

Also I´m going to post more videos on Youtube like I´ve said, we´ll see how often that will be.

It all depends on how much energy I have,

but if you´re curious you can just subscribe to my channel, and then you´ll receive updates when I have published something.

Thank you so much!

Kisses!

For more infomation >> Tackvideo! Thank you video! ENG SUB - Duration: 1:42.

-------------------------------------------

MHA 95 Class Video - Duration: 1:06:27.

For more infomation >> MHA 95 Class Video - Duration: 1:06:27.

-------------------------------------------

Tarot Reading video by Alejandro Jodorowsky for Davinia L - english subtitles - Duration: 10:37.

Good morning

Davinia Lorenzo.

I'm going to read you the Tarot

to thank you

for having contributed

economically

in the making of our movie

Endless Poetry.

I apologize for

taking so long to read you the Tarot,

because creating Endless Poetry

was a colossal work

and I've been very very sick

and I didn't have the energy to do this.

And it took me almost a year to recover.

But now we are happy,

it's a nice spring day,

and your question is likeable.

It's huge:

"what is the goal of my life?"

Imagine.

It's huge.

Well, then I'm going to…

You are 37 years old

and I'm going to...

answer you

with these numbers that you gave me

by shuffling the Tarot,

you see?

The numbers you gave me are equivalent

to the Moon,

to the emperor

and to the…

to the mad man.

That's like…

There's the Moon, which is...

the absolute archetype of the woman,

of the mother, of imagination,

of poetic madness, of magic.

And then there's the emperor,

who is...

the material power,

simply the material power,

the earth,

etcetera,

and masculinity,

inferior to the Moon, obviously.

And the "mat", who leaves this behind,

he leaves this,

he leaves this man behind…

this powerful and inferior man

who doesn't recognize

your marvellous poetic madness.

Well,

but now this has been shuffled, so…

so the cards are not the same.

You've got number 18. I'll go backwards:

22…

22, 21,

20,

19...

Here you've got the first one:

number 18.

Then you've got number 4: 1, 2, 3, 4.

And then you've got number 22.

That's it.

We are done.

The die is cast.

"What is the goal of my life?"

I'm going to tell you immediately:

the ultimate goal,

in my view,

of every human being

is to get

to know

oneself.

You have your goal embedded

in your marvellous matter

and your marvellous spirit

since you were born.

You have to get to know yourself

without fear. That's the goal of life.

On ancient Greek temples,

there were three…

three mottos that were:

"know

yourself."

2:

"Nothing in excess."

3:

"Everything is one."

Knowing oneself is knowing

the Universe.

"Nothing in excess" means to remove

all the prejudices, obstacles…

everything that opposes to…

to you knowing your inner value,

which is marvellous.

And "everything is one"

means that the Universe is a complete unity

and that you are part of this complete unity.

And if there's a God, you're part of it and you have it inside you.

And if it's not God

and it's a mysterious thing, you have that mysterious thing

inside you.

So that's your first card:

the empress.

You see?

Look.

On the other one

you were searching through the emperor,

and here we've got the empress.

So the empress

is someone

who has accumulated experience,

who has developed her…

her mind, her emotionality,

her creative sexuality

and her life,

and who

wants to make use of it,

but she's lost.

It fits your question.

It's all set. Only the goal is missing.

And why is the goal missing?

Because you can't find it in your present life,

because you live a little on the outside of you.

The second card:

the star.

That's what you need to see in you,

you see?

Here you are dressed

in all the clothes that reality gives you,

aren't you?

This one… Your creativity is a prisoner

in this bird, which is your spirit,

but you have it inside you

and you need to take a step.

And here you bend the knee

and you find your place.

You find where

to really live,

the darling place where you belong,

a place

that you honour

and respect.

The first place to live in that you need to find: your body.

To live in yourself.

Whatever your body may be,

that's your place.

And in this place there's a…

a spiritual energy, you see?

A yellow one that she's giving

to the waters of life.

She's giving her spirituality.

And something comes from within your legs: an energy…

a dark-blue and mysterious energy,

a vital energy

that comes to enrich the world too:

your creativity

You see? And you are giving that

and realizing that you are…

that all is one, that you're in the middle of the stars,

that the celestial bodies are part of you,

in the middle of nature,

in the middle of this wonder

that is the Universe.

That's your goal: to reach that,

to reach hap-pi-ness,

happiness, happiness,

satori, enlightenment, grace,

all these things are…

they are…

examples

of what

the goal is:

to be happy.

And what's being happy?

Being alive.

And what's being alive?

Day to day

recognising the passing

of the daily miracle.

What's being happy?

Creating friendships.

And what's friendship?

It's creating things with other people,

exchanging,

cooperating,

accepting life.

And once you'll have accepted life, what do we have here? What do we have?

The force,

you see?

So

your goal tells you:

"you are doing that,

but you have a very strong creative sexual force restrained there,

as restrained as in the beginning. That has not been realized yet.

Then that great passion that you need to live

has to wait for you!"

You've already got three cards. I'm going to

pull number 3 out…

card number three: 1, 2, 3.

Look which card you get,

to see your spiritual fulfilment:

you get temperance,

which is what is called,

generally by kids,

the guardian angel.

But look, look how wonderful,

how wonderful.

This is what you are.

You have pots in your hands, don't you?

And here also!

Nothing more than the pots,

what you are you are giving it;

you are giving it to the world.

But what you give to the world

in your fulfilment

you give it to you.

What you give,

you give it to you,

and what you don't give, you take it from you.

I think that, as you asked that question of what your goal is,

you have lived taking from you,

taking a lot from you, because you…

you haven't been giving

what you are.

Your goal

is "nothing in excess", but it's giving

what you have.

And what is giving? Your creativity.

Once you have given your creativity,

once you have grown plants, gardens,

paintings,

art,

poetry,

so many things,

(art is the wonder of wonders)

all this that you give you give it to yourself.

And then you find yourself

and you reach your goal,

you are

ful-fil-led,

hap-pi-ness.

And the best way for this to happen is to be thankful,

to learn to be thankful for what you are.

And I thank you

for your marvellous contribution

to a movie that pretends to be pure art

and not industrial art.

Thank you very much

Davinia Lorenzo.

What a beautiful name you have.