Audio vs. Video Podcasting Pt 1 | Will Video Replace Audio?
A little while back I was chatting with an audio podcaster. He was excited because he would soon be “upgrading” to video podcasting. I asked about the reason for the change. The answer was: “Because it’s the future.” I didn’t find that to be the best reason for a change.
There’s no doubt that web video has rapidly gained popularity over the past year, especially with the advent of the iPod with video and the hype behind You Tube. The consumption of online and portable video will only continue to grow. But will video replace audio?
The answer is NO. Audio and video both have their advantages and disadvantages. I advise against adopting video just because it seems “in vogue.”
A report from Nielsen Media Research at the end of 2006 showed that only 2.2% of files played by Video iPod users on either iTunes or the device itself were videos. When measured by time spent consuming content, video still only made up 11% of the content consumed by Video iPod users. I’d venture to say these numbers are lower than Apple or video content producers expected.
Again, I’m not trying to advocate one format over another. It’s just important to be aware of the realities of audio and video consumption. It’s also important to consider the right criteria when choosing which format to use.
In my next post, I’ll take a look at the advantages and disadvantages of each format and present some important things to consider when choosing which to use yourself.
January 17th, 2007 07:50
You are so right, Jason. Audio and video are two completely different media. With their own advantages. We know, that people use podcast to make use of time used on activities like walking the dog, biking to and from work, cleaning, jogging, etc. and video doesn´t work there. Audio is a background media. Video is a foreground media which demands full attention.
Besides - too many video podcasts are just talking heads.
I am an audio person - is that too obvious ;-)
January 17th, 2007 11:06
I consume a lot more audio myself for the very reason you bring up. There are a few video podcasts I watch, but talking heads do become tedious unless there’s a compelling reason to have the visual aspect.
Jason
January 17th, 2007 14:17
For my own podcasts, video only makes sense in limited ways. Folks don’t need to see me doing one of my solo shows, but I do sometime push out little video postcards or snippets which I think they might enjoy. I, too, am majorlu an audio consumer, usually listening in the car as I drive from consulting call to consulting call. Video can’t be consumed in that environment, although sitting with a video iPod while having lunch might be enjoyable.
January 17th, 2007 17:11
One big point to remember: you can’t watch video while you drive or you die. You also can’t effectively surf and watch video at the same time. This is not to demean video, but to point out two very pragmatic reasons you’ll always want audio as well as video.
January 17th, 2007 21:52
Video might not be the second wave on Ipods, but it gets a lot more use on the web itself. And I think, as a medium, it is much better than audio or the written word in terms of getting the point across. Its really a matter of what you are applying it to. But, will it replace audio? Nope.
January 17th, 2007 22:07
Dave,
I can see what you’re saying about getting the point across, but do you feel like video *always* gets the point across better as a general rule? Or is it superfluous in some cases?
For certain kinds of information, it’s more effective to just offer audio. Video would just be extraneous and not add any value.
Even further, there are cases where I prefer just to have the text because I can skim that faster than I can jump through audio or video.
Granted, their is a balance somewhere between the ability to convey information efficiently and the ability to connect with the audience on a more personal/emotional level.
This illustrates another point. It’s important to offer your content in multiple formats when it’s practical. Everyone will have different preferences for how they consume your content.
January 17th, 2007 22:16
[…] This is an interesting experience. Ever since I started on the web, everything has been done using the written word and images. Podcast and videos, though, have really taken off. It is an issue of debate on just how big an impact the video Ipod has had on this, however sites like Youtube have had a significant impact. Today, with the popularity of broadband, video content on the web is not only a very real thing, but it is also a damn good idea. Well, today, Rich and I spent some time messing around with cameras, cords, lighting, our poor-man’s green screen (used for super-imposing backgrounds), and everything else. Rich is trained in video editing, and the image above shows Rich in one of our practice shots as we did microphone testing. For anybody who wants to produce professional level video content, it takes a lot of time, patience and work. As is obvious, we never needed to do stuff like this working with HTML. The actual filming starts tomorrow on a project we are working on. You can check out some of Rich’s video content on PCMechTV, but none of those were done with the new set and many of them are simply screencasts. These things are a work in progress, and as we move forward with the procedure, we’ll post it here for your reading pleasure. Perhaps Rich will chime in, too. Might be interesting to those of you interested in taking your own voyage into online video. Share and Enjoy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. […]
January 18th, 2007 21:13
I would say it depends on the type of content. Technical content, for example, might be better offered using text and images (in other words, traditional HTML). However, the beauty of video is that it provides information along with the visual mass. By balancing theory with the mass, users get a full understanding of whatever it is you are talking about.
Also, it is hard to think of a better medium if you are trying to reach a person at an emotional level. It can be done with audio, however video provides a richer experience.
Video has limitations, yes, but, it holds a user’s attention better than anything else, IF it is well-produced.
BTW, I’m simply speaking here from the viewpoint of a publisher. And those of us in this business are obviously looking, generally, to get a point across to our readers and ultimately get them to do something we want them to do. As a end-user, obviously, video is not always what I want. :)
January 24th, 2007 20:01
[…] Audio vs. Video Podcasting Pt 2 | Considerations for Choosing the Best Format for You After a week of jury duty, I’m back in the blogging seat. It was an interesting experience, but it brought several hectic days of playing catch up. Now where was I? In my last post, I talked about the importance of carefully choosing which format was best for your podcast–audio or video–rather than submitting to any hype or false assumptions. Now I’d like to take a look at the advantages and disadvantages of each format. Advantages of Audio 1. Audio is a background media. Video is a foreground media. I borrowed that statement from a comment made by Karin Høgh on my last post. In other words, it’s much easier for people to consume audio on the go or during “down time”. You can listen to a podcast while mowing the lawn. You can’t watch a video podcast while mowing. 2. Audio generally takes less production time This is not a hard fast rule, but in general an audio podcast will take less time to produce than a video podcast. A half-hour show could be done in a few hours while a five-minute video clip could take all day. 3. Audio requires less bandwidth Audio produces smaller files than video. Smaller files don’t require as much data transfer to send from your web site to your audience. Bandwidth is one of the primary costs of podcasting. 4. Audio podcasts can contain more info Typically, podcasts consumers are willing to consume much longer audio content at a time. A listener might consume a half-hour podcast at once, whereas they usually would only sit through video clips that are less than five minutes. This allows you to convey more information at one time. 5. Audio formats and compression are easier to understand and use If you have ever used Quicktime to export a video, you’ve probably noticed that it can be hard to choose just the right video compression settings and codec. Audio compression is usually much easier. The MP3 audio format is universal. You can depend on the vast majority of your audience being able to consume it. Choosing a video format is trickier. You may find you need to support multiple formats such as MP4 and WMV in order for most people to be able to consume your media. Advantages of Video 1. The visual aspect allows for a more powerful message Having audio *and* visual elements at your disposal you can convey a more powerful message. The impression is stronger and can last longer. This is very useful when it comes to branding. 2. Some advertisers prefer video This is related to the last point. You might find it easier to attract advertisers when you offer the opportunity for visual advertising. 3. Video can be viral Most the examples of viral multimedia content that you hear about are video clips (e.g. OK Go, Coke and Mentos, etc.) There’s something about sharing short video clips that’s very appealing to people. You just don’t see that happening with audio. Other Considerations and Points […]