BlackBerry Z10

I’ve never taken BlackBerry that seriously.

It’s main feature has been based around (secure) messaging, and the amount of messaging I do (secure or otherwise) is quite minimal. For me my mobile phones are primarily used as portable computing type gadgets, with an emphasis placed on internet-related stuff. (If my phone rings I totally freak out – using it for calls is its least used function.)

However it’s been this ‘internet-related’ bit that that got me looking at them. I wanted a fast 4G connection device suitable for lap-top and tablet tethering, but already having a really nice smartphone I didn’t want to spend large sums of money replacing that when the only gain would be 4G, so I was looking for a budget-end device to compliment this high-end phone.

This is where the BlackBerry Z10 came in. The cheapest 4G devices I could see were a couple of Nokia phones, but they had rather poor screens and would only tether as a Wi-Fi hotspot. I wanted this feature but I also wanted to be able to tether via a USB connection and these would not do that.

The next cheapest I could see was in the Carphonewarehouse chain which was selling the BlackBerry Z10 (unlocked) at a very competitive price. I did my research, read various reviews (which generally rated the phone quite highly, but at its original price rather over-priced) and then went ahead and got one.

From the moment I switched it on I was impressed. A really nice screen (1280 x 768 at 356 ppi, compared to the latest iPhone 5s at 1136 x 640 and 326 ppi) and gives crisp text and great colours. An operating system that I found quicker to learn and more intuitive that either iOS, Android or WP8, and with its ability to run most Android apps as well as native BlackBerry ones, no lack of app functionality. The browser is probably the best phone browser I’ve come across in a mobile phone, opening up difficult web pages faster and more completely than any other. Scrolling across screens is smooth and fast, apps open up quickly, the microSD card slot lets you add additional memory; it’s just a really nice device to use!

If I was going to ask for one improvement, then that would be battery life. It does give me a full day’s use but it would have been nice to be able to squeeze two days out of it. Naturally it will do my Wi-Fi and USB tethering. (It should tether through Bluetooth too, though I’ve never bothered with that.)

This has just been such an unexpectedly pleasant experience its got me re-thinking quite what I expect from a mobile phone or tablet type device. I suspected that Microsoft’s Windows Phone 8 system will become over the next year or so far more popular, and where a few weeks ago I really could not have cared as to BlackBerry’s future, now I hope they do manage to get their problems sorted and give Microsoft a good run for their money at the alternative to the iOS / Android duopoly.

Some YouTube Z10 thoughts.

Rode smartLav

sadly disappointed with my Rode smartLav mic.

I had always associated Rode with quality, I’ve used their products before and always been very happy with them. However I find myself sadly disappointed with the quality of my recently purchased  Rode SmartLav lavalier microphone. They advertise it as “a professional-grade wearable microphone” but I found it far from that.

The first thing I noticed was a physical problem, the foam cover / windshield was not properly attached to its frame. That got sorted by fully removing the cover and then the application of some superglue to re-attach it.

The microphone did come with a tie-clip which does quite a good job of holding the device and keeping the cable secure. The microphone itself is quite small, somewhat thicker than a toothpick, a lot thinner than a pencil. Assuming you could route the cable out of sight then it could go totally unnoticed if attached to the side of a monitor or to one side of a desk. Its omnidirectional pick-up pattern means it does not have to be pointing at the speaker in order to pick up speech.

The device is advertised as a smartphone device, I did try plugging it into my Zoom H1 recorder and also my video camera but (as expected) it didn’t work with either. I’ve tried it with three different phones. Using a Nokia Lumia 520 it gave an audio file that sounded a bit wooly with a loss of upper end frequencies. Using a Samsung Galaxy Note 2 gave a very tinny sound with loss at both the lower and upper frequencies. My iPhone gave the best overall sound in terms of frequency response however I still class it as ‘poor’ and far from the ‘professional-grade’ that Rode claim. There was also a noticeable background hiss all the way through and an intermittent crackle just to add to the distraction.

The one area where it did perform better than other microphones I’ve used is outside in that it picked up less wind noise than most. This does not, however, compensate for its overall poor quality of performance.

Sorry Rode, the phrase “could do better” springs to mind.

Link to my YouTube test of it.

Google+ and Windows Phone 8 surprise

Google forcing Google+ onto YouTubers has had an unexpected result for me.

I do use (and now rely on doing things through) the cloud. Whether e-mail, word processing, spreadsheet work or general video or photo storage, it’s all done remotely and for some time now I’ve been happy enough using Google. However the way they’ve handled this forcing of YouTube commenters to use Google+ has irritated me in the extreme. The result of this was to go and look around at alternative cloud sources including Microsoft’s SkyDrive. Up till now I had rather ignored it but was pleasantly surprised to see how they had integrated Office functionality into it. This in turn got me thinking about mobile cloud access.

For years I’ve had two phones on me. One working through an on-going contract, the other (an elderly iPhone 3GS) working off a PAYG SIM (and on a different network). This means that if my contract network is out of service or the phone battery flat I still have internet / cloud access through the PAYG device. (It also provides me with an alternative mobile number for when I don’t want to give out my personal one.)

Having found this SkyDrive was unexpectedly good I thought I’d give a try with Microsoft’s Windows Phone 8 as a back-up mobile system (my current main phone is a Samsung Galaxy Note 2, so therefore Android). So went out and got a Nokia Lumia 520 as a PAYG upgrade which was the cheapest Windows Phone 8 that I could find.

I was absolutely amazed by it. Despite being a low specification / bottom of the range model the screen was nice and clear, apps and programs opened quickly and ran smoothly, there was no hesitation in scrolling, and from an initial charge it gave me three days use (and even then was still at 25% battery level). I really had not expected such a positive experience both from the phone itself and from the operating system. Where the icons and tiles on a desk-top Windows 8 machine annoy me (and I always switch across to the standard old style desktop) here they suit the environment really well.

The Windows Phone App store is nothing like as well populated as its Android or Apple counterpart, however almost everything I want is there. As for anything that I’m not happy with I can always access it from its web page anyway, so that’s not a great problem. The one irritation with the phone is that the screen does seem like a magnet for finger prints and smudges. I must see if I can get a screen protector for it which may improve this, but it’s not really a big issue, after all this is as smart phones go about the cheapest one on the market. I can quite see why I’ve seen reports that in parts of the world it is the best-selling smartphone!

So from being almost a Google fan-boy – Chrome, Gmail, Google documents / Drive, relying on Google Calendar,  Android user –  from their poorly executed action of forcing Google+ upon its YouTube users (me) I’ve ‘discovered’ a whole new alternative cloud structure which I’m slowly moving across to.

Thank’s Google.

My YouTube thoughts on this and the Nokia 520

Bit Rate Settings

A while ago I rendered out a video at 1080p and then again at 720p.

As expected the 720p file size was considerably smaller than the 1080p one. However I thought I’d play a bit more with this as I was a little ‘uncertain’ with the results I was getting, after all not just image size (1080 / 720) had changed, but bit rate too. On play back both videos looked ‘good quality’ and even stretching the 720 up to fill a 1080 size window didn’t noticeably reduce its viewing quality.

So I took a short 20 second clip standing on a street corner which started with the camera held still (so a mix of non-moving buildings but with cars and people going past) and then at the 10 second point panned the camera around so everything was now moving relative to the camera.
Then it was a case of rendering this out at 1080p various times, the only thing being changed between each session being the bit rate, working up from around 800 Kbps to 32Mbps.

Down at the low bit rates stationary items looked all right, but moving items (people, cars, the buildings when the camera was panning around) were of very poor quality. At the high bit rate end of the scale everything looked crisp and nice, however both rendering time and file size had also grown.

What was also apparent was that the choice of playback program was significant. Different players, VLC, Windows Media Player, QuickTime, all will play back the same clip differently. Same applies to using different browsers as a play-back engine – they are not all equal. Also what you have recorded makes a difference. A clip with little movement and few colours will be very different from a clip with lots of movement and activity.

Then a matter of working up from the bottom to find the bit rate cut-off point between where a clip was unacceptable and one was watchable; and coming down from the high bit rates and at what stage starting to notice a degradation in quality. Then finding an overall mid-point balance between quality and file size .

So what this really means is that there is no one ideal bit rate setting that’s going to cover all situations. For my set-up, with my camera and my editing software and thinking of uploading to somewhere like Vimeo or YouTube, then I’ll be thinking of working at 8 Mbps for indoor videos where there’s not a lot going on, and 12Mbps for outdoor videos full of colour and movement.
But this just my experience. You will need to do your own experiments to find your best compromise settings that will suite your equipment and set-up.

Rode Videomic Pro

I’ve had my Rode Videomic Pro now for around the last two and a half years.

It was bought to give my Panasonic GH2 an improved sound quality when I was out and about videoing. My previous video device, a Canon HF100 has a non-standard hot shoe / accessory slot, so for that I had to get the Canon microphone especially for that camera, which of course was incompatible with my GH2. However I must give Canon their due, it’s a great microphone and did everything that I asked or expected from it.

This Videomic Pro has also been a great device. Although I don’t use it that often it has still suffered a fair amount of misuse and abuse, lived in holdalls and generally travelled around with me, but has always done the business when needed. It has been a bit of an irritation in that the rubber strips which provide the sound and vibration isolation between the microphone itself and its frame often detach themselves from their mounting positions, but I can live with that. As a video camera microphone I like it and I also often put it onto a small tripod and use it as a desktop mic. In this set-up sometimes feeding it directly into my camera, sometimes feeding it into my Zoom H1 and use the Zoom to record the audio.

Its one failure has been out in windy conditions. My Canon mic with its dead cat windshield handled windy conditions really well. I got the Rode made windshield for this Videomic Pro assuming that getting the proper branded item would give me good performance, however I’ve been very disappointed with its abilities to reduce wind noise. Where the microphone was money well spent, this Rode dead cat windshield was a total waste. A shame as Rode usually produce good products. I’ll just have to look elsewhere for a windshield.

My new Kindle Paperwhite.

A couple of days ago now I went and bought A new Kindle Paperwhite which had recently been released.

It’s not the first Kindle I have had. Just under three years ago I went down to John Lewis and bought what was then a 3rd generation Kindle and I remember being there wondering what am I going to make of this.
I do like my books. I like the action of turning the page, the feel of it, the cover, the fact that as you repeatedly read it it ages in changes in character. You might get a slight rip on a page or finger marks or splash of coffee on it. That all goes to making up the on-going reading experience, so what was I going to make of doing it electronically?

By the end of the first day I knew I was going to love it to bits. No worry about when the novelty wears off it’ll end up on the shelf just collecting dust. I really do like this as a reading experience and far better than using my iPad. That’s a great device where graphics are involved and for colour magazines that sort of thing. As a reader it’s not that bad a reader, but if I’m using it for more that about 40 minutes I’ve kind of had enough and want a little break, where using my Kindle I can settle down for a good evening’s read and immediately feel myself involved with the book, where using my iPad I always know I’m looking at an electronic device.

About six weeks ago my old Kindle developed a fault with some corruption up in the top quarter of the screen. This basically made it unusable. There was no hesitation or second thoughts, I immediately knew I wanted a replacement device. A quick look on the internet showed that a new model was due out fairly soon so I decided to wait. The reviews of the new Paperwhite model were all favourable so when it came out I headed off down to my local Waterstones book shop and got one.

I really do like it and am so glad I’m back with a working device again, I think these Kindles are great examples of things that just do one thing only but they do it really well.

My new Kindle Paperwhite does not have a physical keyboard but is a touch screen device and so uses a virtual keyboard. This I prefer to my old Kindle’s physical keyboard which I found a bit irritating to use – the buttons were too small and fiddly for my liking. However there’s one thing I do prefer with the old model and that’s for page turning it actually has physical buttons down the side where this new one requires a touch of the screen to turn the page. I prefer the buttons, but that’s just my personal view on that.

With my old model I did pay extra to get it with 3G functionality, but in reality in the 3 years I’ve had it I don’t suppose I’ve used its 3G more than half a dozen times. Wi-Fi at home means that I can use that for downloading books, and for direct transfer use its USB connection. When out and about there’s plenty of locations with free Wi-Fi or I can set up my mobile phone as a local Wi-Fi hot-spot. So when I got this new model I didn’t bother paying the extra for the 3G version.

The other difference with the new model compared to my old is that this new one has a backlight. I tend not to have it on for normal usage however it is really useful when in poor lighting conditions. I can see this making life a lot easier where you bedtime partner wants the lights out but you want to keep on reading!

Another thing I really like about the Kindles which does give them an advantage over your paper book is that when you come across a word that you don’t understand it’s so easy to look it up (and without disturbing your reading routine in the way that having to put a paper book down, go and find your dictionary, look up the word, then get back to your original book and pick up reading again does). Just being able to touch the word and have a pop-up definition window appear is really nice.

The old model specifications talk about a month out of the battery for ordinary use and I found that was quite realistic. With this new model they’re talking about two months out of the battery so we’re able to go away for holidays and that sort of thing not having to worry about cables and chargers, though it will charge off any USB connection.

Would I upgrade to this new Paperwhite if I had a working older model? That depends on the importance to you of having the backlight. For me personally I was quite happy without it, however my upgrade was forced upon me with my old one’s screen fault, so going to this model was a natural choice. If you’ve got an existing one without a backlight then you’re going to have to make a decision here yourself, is it worth it or is it not. All I will say is old or new, I do love my Kindle. As I commented on earlier it’s one of those devices that just does one task and it does it really well.

So I’ll happily say thumbs up for my Kindle Paperwhite.

Samsung Gear smartwatch, not so impressed.

Samsung has recently announced its new smartwatch, the Gear.

As someone who likes his gadgets and that sort of technology-type stuff, a practical smartwatch linked through to my phone could be something I’d have in interest in. This watch has a workable colour screen 4 cm across and resolution of 320 by 320, and with all the things you might expect from such a device in the way of a camera and talking to your (Samsung) phone. (Compare this resolution to when desk top PCs first hit the mass market with monitors of 14 inches / 35.5 cm and a resolution of 640 by 480.)

However the one thing that totally kills it for me is the battery life. Samsung’s talking about a day’s use (and that’s when new!) which is just not what would interest me.

For something like this I need to know I can go away for a long week-end, use is extensively (but still sensibly) without any worry of it going flat or need to have to take a charger with me. So we’re talking about charging it Thursday night, going away Friday, then Sat and Sun out adventuring, heading back Monday for a Monday night charge, and doing this confidently knowing that it’s going to remain a working useful device for the whole period.

It would have been nice if they had managed to build into it a self-winding system similar to an automatic mechanical watch. This would have worked a small generator to help keep the battery charged as you move. There’s nothing special in this, kinetic-based quarts watches have been doing this for some years.

I guess it’s the usual story of never buy the early versions of anything, wait for the second generation to arrive.

My YouTube thoughts on it.

(Also Samsung Galaxy Gear announcement.)

Resolution size and quality

Video resolution, file size and image quality.

A while ago I thought I’d take my camera out for an afternoon’s videoing and so headed off to Linlithgow Palace. Once I’d got some editing done I found I had a video of just under 10 minutes in length. Usually I render out at 720p for a YouTube or Vimeo upload, but this time I thought I’d render at 1080p just to see how things went. At the end of the processing I found myself with a file of just over 2 gigabyte. This I thought a little bit large for uploading from home so went up to Uni did my upload (to Vimeo) from there. That went nice and fast, in fact it uploaded faster than the length of time it took me to type out title, description and all that sort of stuff. Once back home thought I would re-render it but this time in my more usual 720p (other settings the same) just to do a compare and contrast. My just under 10 minute came down at just over 400 megabyte.

So we’re talking about one fifth the size of the 1080p video. Playing the two videos side by side it was hard to notice any difference in quality, it was there but you really had to pick around the edges to see it. Now and again I’d pause at a suitable moment where perhaps a a sign was in view or maybe a car number plate or something similar and try and read it, and it was more readable in the 1080p version. However as a flowing video it was quite difficult to tell the difference between the two, yet the 720 giving me so much more free hard drive space compared to 1080.

I also rendered it out in standard definition quality at 360p size (looking towards uploads for mobile devices or older smart phones). Here we had a file size of just under 60 megabyte, or a little under 3% of the 1080p file size. Comparing the video here to the others there was a very definite reduction in quality. It still wasn’t too bad to watch, however when you had this 360 next to either the 720 or 1080 the difference really jumped out at you. On the other hand it was still more than good enough for a portable device if you were on the train.

Something to think about. Take the 1080 HD video size, which is a 1920 by 1080 rectangle. Multiply that out and it comes to just over 2 million pixels. Or to put it another way, if you’re in a shop talking about video and cameras and the sales staff are busy trying to sell you this camera rather than that camera because this camera has more mega pixels on the sensor… well, if you’re going to actually film at the native HD resolution then all you really need is this just over 2 mega-pixel size sensor. Bigger does not always mean better.

 

Premiere Pro or Final Cut?

Premiere Pro or Final Cut, which do I prefer.

I got my first proper video camera about 5 years ago, a small Panasonic non-HD camera (HD was around, but rather expensive for something I only wanted to experiment with), and like many people my first editing experience was with Windows Movie Maker. I soon realised that doing this was quite fun, and as this luckily coincided with a sharp fall in HD camera prices, I got myself a nice Canon HD camera.

At the time Windows Movie Maker would not do HD video so I bought a copy of Corel’s VideoStudio X2. However as time went on I wanted to do more with VideoStudio than what I was.

As I was also needing an upgrade for my PC I thought I’d basically start again, but rather than buy a new computer and then find software for it and then find how to use it I thought I’d firstly find some good video editing tutorials, see what software they was using, then see what hardware was needed for running that software. After a bit of browsing around (and some really horrific tutorials on YouTube) I came across a site called IzzyVideo, run by Izzy Hyman. He has done some really good tutorials (some free, some subscription only), both on editing techniques and on general video creation. What software was he tutoring on – Final Cut Pro 7 and Final Cut Express. What hardware does that need – Apple Mac.

Final Cut 7 was a bit expensive for me, plus it was overkill for what I wanted, but Final Cut Express, especially at education price made sense. Likewise I couldn’t afford a new Mac but a friend sourced a second hand MacBook for me. So that sorted that out, I’ll move across to Mac and go Final Cut Express.

Time goes by and there’s then the release of Final Cut Pro X (and all the controversy that caused!). It was released without quite a few features considered essential by the serious film making community, however for my use it was great, especially as Izzy Hyman very quickly released some great tutorials for it.

Time goes by again and I find myself playing with Photoshop CS6 and it’s through its limited video editing abilities I became aware of Premiere Pro. I also realise I could do with a system with more powerful graphics than what I was currently using. My two generations’ old MacBook Air seems to run all this software well enough for me, but it’s not really an ideal machine for this sort of thing. Then by chance I found myself having access to a more powerful Windows system and at the same time found some good Premiere Pro tutorials up on the Creative Cow web site so I thought I would give it a try (and taking advantage of Premiere Pro being for both Windows and Mac).

Both Premiere Pro and Final Cut are non-linear editors where you can chop and change video clips and drag them around. Both have numerous different effects built in and you can adjust white balance and sort out colour correction. Titles and captions can be added and both have audio editing facilities. The only real restriction on them is your imagination as to what you want to do!

On both, where my original video has been a couple of simple clips, perhaps me just talking about a film I’ve seen recently and have not required a significant amount of processing I’ve had the whole process of import, clip editing, sound adjustment, and then rendered out ready for YouTube upload all done well within an hour. So if things go well and you’ve got it right in camera at the video recording stage then for short videos things can be done really quickly.

One thing I like about Premiere Pro compared to Final Cut is that it is more flexible when it comes to reading video files. I copy the recordings across from my camera onto my computer hard drive and Final Cut wants to see the whole file structure of the AVCHD directory, and if anything is played with or altered or deleted anywhere within that directory tree then Final Cut can throw a bit of a hissy fit and doesn’t want to work with the files, where with Premiere Pro you can happily use your system’s file manager to tunnel down into the directory and into the individual recording clips, get rid of the ones you don’t want, copy across into this area others you might want to use and Premiere Pro is still quite happy with everything.

Final Cut also wants to transcode new clips before it will use them which can delay getting started where Premiere Pro will run clips natively, but then I’ve found for editing Final Cut does seem to run that bit more smoothly. It also just needs say two or three actions to complete a task where Premiere Pro may need three or four actions. There’s one area I’ve found Final Cut to be far better at, and that’s with green screen / chroma key editing. I can get a good key sorted out far quicker and with better results  compared to Premiere.

Both can be a bit fiddly when it comes to settings for exporting and both take their time for the final rendering processing. This is where the more powerful hardware really comes into play for cutting down that time.

I’ve found both Premiere Pro and Final Cut great products. Skills learnt through using one are quite transferable across to the other. Both have been fun to use, on the other hand both have given me headaches at times.

Overall, I think if I was just going to be doing standard video editing and only video editing, then I’d choose Final Cut. Since it came out they have updated it with most of those missing features that weren’t there at time of release. However as I’m going to be playing around with Photoshop as well and the way Adobe is enabling their different programs to smoothly interact with each other means that for the time being I’m going to stick with Premiere Pro.

What I would suggest to anyone whose currently undecided is to find a suitable tutorial web site (I found Creative Cow quite good), compare the tutorials for one against the tutorials for the other and then decide on which you would feel most comfortable using.

I’ll will also add that I did briefly play with Avid, however although it’s education price is quite competitive I did find it rather klunky to use and it didn’t settle down to it. I just found it a bit too irritating. I could see it had huge potential, however it wasn’t for me.

My YouTube video talking about this.

Bebo

Things happening at Bebo.

I’ve just noticed a comment in the press saying that Michael Birch, one of the founders of Bebo, has actually bought it back in some bankruptcy sale for around $1 million – if we go back in time a bit to Bebo’s peak, I think Birch sold it off to AOL for something around $850 million. That was at a time where in many countries Bebo was the dominant social networking site, this being at a time before Facebook had really started its rise to domination.

I do remember at the start of an academic year walking through one of the computer areas in my campus library and noticing one or two of the students had this Bebo site up on their screens. At that time I had not heard of it before and was curious as to what it was. Fast forward 12 weeks and we’re almost at the Christmas break, walking through the same computer area again and found an almost exact opposite situation – where there were only one or two people who did not have a Bebo window up somewhere on their monitor. It really had gone from nowhere to everywhere that quickly. However Birch then sold it off to AOL, and once they got their hands on it they did their usual thing and made a total pig’s ear of it.

The faster something rises up then the faster it can fall down, and so under AOL’s guidance it rapidly descanted into almost total oblivion and irrelevance. AOL in turn sold it on to Criterion Capital Partners. However it did maintain (and still does as far as I can tell) a sort of core number of active users on the site.

Now that Michael Birch has paid $1 million to get it back I wonder what he’s got planned for it. He can’t just re-invent it as it was, Twitter and Facebook have taken that ground away from him. So what will he do?

I think it is going to be a case of ‘I’ve no idea’, because if it was that obvious such that I could think of it someone else would have already done it, so he’s going to have to come up with something quite novel and new.

After all, it is one thing to develop a brand new site that no one has ever heard of so it doesn’t have either a good or bad reputation; it’s another thing to pick up an old site which is seen by many as a bit of a joke and to try and turn it around. On the other hand he has got a well-known brand name behind him again. We’ll just have to see what he does with it, I’m almost tempted to sign up again purely to keep an eye as to what may develop.