Another thing that is awesome:
"Starships!" made it onto io9 today! Thank you to 
were_duck for the tip.
The thrill of having the vid featured there outweighs what I'm about to say by far, but following on our recent conversation about citing creators and, more important to me personally, including or linking to vid context when posting a rec, it stood out to me that the short post by Annalee Newitz included the YouTube embed without title or attribution, a link to Nicki Minaj's official video, a link to Vividcon's website, and my excerpted source list, but only referred to "this fan video" and "the filmmakers." The result was a flurry of the "No Babylon 5/Red Dwarf/Cowboy Bebop?!"-type comments that I am now expecting and resigned to in the absence of my notes about deadlines and access to source -- they continue to stream in on the Tumblr post as well -- along with the "Ew, Nicki Minaj" comments (which don't bother me). And, not to sound ungrateful, a nice handful of happy viewers. The frustration is just that I (and others) keep trying to explain why the vid includes only what it includes, but because of the nature of certain sharing platforms and because of common reccing practices, it doesn't stick.
What also resulted, however, was that someone named eregyrn, who came to my defense on the MarySue.com post a few weeks ago, and later someone named telepresence, quickly stepped in in the comments section to provide that very context, along with links and a greensilver/anatsuno-style call for vidder credit. There ensued a confusing thread in which Annalee said she'd already linked to the YouTube page (she hasn't; there's only the embed, which means people have to know and want to click on the video and then click on the little YouTube icon to view over there; but to be fair, some people are doing that, because a bunch of comments have been coming in on YouTube this afternoon) and that my name wasn't on the vid (which eregyrn pointed out is incorrect, and also, the video title on YouTube says "by bironic" and the LJ link is in the description right above the source list she quoted, so even though it's easy to miss the opening vid credits, it isn't hard to track down who made it). But she kindly amended the post to include my name, which now links to the LJ master post. So that is cool. I need to find and thank eregyrn somehow.
In conclusion: io9! Whee! And this lovely blog post by Doctor Science on Tuesday, which expands on a comment she made to Masters of War about vids being like bouillon cubes.
.
I think I've settled on a new vid to work on, finally. Not sure what it'll be for -- maybe Kink Bingo -- but after four months of lying fallow it'll be nice to get back into practice.
were_duck for the tip.
The thrill of having the vid featured there outweighs what I'm about to say by far, but following on our recent conversation about citing creators and, more important to me personally, including or linking to vid context when posting a rec, it stood out to me that the short post by Annalee Newitz included the YouTube embed without title or attribution, a link to Nicki Minaj's official video, a link to Vividcon's website, and my excerpted source list, but only referred to "this fan video" and "the filmmakers." The result was a flurry of the "No Babylon 5/Red Dwarf/Cowboy Bebop?!"-type comments that I am now expecting and resigned to in the absence of my notes about deadlines and access to source -- they continue to stream in on the Tumblr post as well -- along with the "Ew, Nicki Minaj" comments (which don't bother me). And, not to sound ungrateful, a nice handful of happy viewers. The frustration is just that I (and others) keep trying to explain why the vid includes only what it includes, but because of the nature of certain sharing platforms and because of common reccing practices, it doesn't stick.
What also resulted, however, was that someone named eregyrn, who came to my defense on the MarySue.com post a few weeks ago, and later someone named telepresence, quickly stepped in in the comments section to provide that very context, along with links and a greensilver/anatsuno-style call for vidder credit. There ensued a confusing thread in which Annalee said she'd already linked to the YouTube page (she hasn't; there's only the embed, which means people have to know and want to click on the video and then click on the little YouTube icon to view over there; but to be fair, some people are doing that, because a bunch of comments have been coming in on YouTube this afternoon) and that my name wasn't on the vid (which eregyrn pointed out is incorrect, and also, the video title on YouTube says "by bironic" and the LJ link is in the description right above the source list she quoted, so even though it's easy to miss the opening vid credits, it isn't hard to track down who made it). But she kindly amended the post to include my name, which now links to the LJ master post. So that is cool. I need to find and thank eregyrn somehow.
In conclusion: io9! Whee! And this lovely blog post by Doctor Science on Tuesday, which expands on a comment she made to Masters of War about vids being like bouillon cubes.
.
I think I've settled on a new vid to work on, finally. Not sure what it'll be for -- maybe Kink Bingo -- but after four months of lying fallow it'll be nice to get back into practice.