If you plan to use someone else’s work (photographs, video, or music) in your video, based on the assumption that it falls under the “fair use” umbrella, you might want to take a look at the video below by the Stanford Center for the Internet and Society.
It’s quite long (34:51 min) and not designed to entertain, but is one of the best general explanations of “fair use” as it applies to video. CIS was asked by YouTube to answer a number of common questions about “fair use”, using specific examples to illustrate. The information in the video is not legal advice, however, and the speakers caution that they are only providing “general guidance”. Their recommendation is to get legal advice if you are not sure.
Below, I’ve summarized the definition of “fair use” as well as the four criteria that determine “fair use”.
What is “fair use”? The term refers to a set of exceptions whereby someone can use copyrighted material without permission. There are a lot of misconceptions about what one can use without permission, especially if it’s found on the internet.
What are the four criteria?
1. What are you doing with the copyrighted material? Is your use transformative?
2. What is the nature of the copyrighted material? Fictional and non-fictional material are gauged slightly differently.
3. Is the amount of the copyrighted material used in your creation reasonable? That is, do you use only what is necessary to make your point and no more?
4. Will your use impact the market for the original copyrighted material?
Want to know how these criteria apply to common scenarios involving video? Watch the video:
As a scientist, I’ve been trained to write technical papers and to give technical presentations to colleagues. These are our primary modes of science communication. However, things have been changing rapidly in how people share information. I can find on the internet a video showing me how to do just about anything…from making a souffle to how to dance the tango. A couple of years ago, our toilet broke, which to fix was going to require complete replacement of the entire flushing system. I briefly considered calling a plumber, but then had the idea to look online to see if I could find some information. I quickly found several videos on YouTube that clearly and professionally showed, step-by-step, how to replace the fill valve assembly. One was particularly well done; shot from various angles and showing each critical step as well as providing advice (in voiceover) along the way. After watching this four minute video, I felt confident that I could repair our toilet. I went to the store, purchased the replacement parts, and within a couple of hours had a working toilet again. Here’s the video I watched:
Now, as a scientist (or a student of science), imagine how much easier it would be to replicate someone else’s research if you could see a video of how they actually set up their intricate lab apparatus or calibrated an instrument or set up a field experiment. Some researchers spend months working out a technique that someone has described in a paper but that could be quickly demonstrated in a video. Yet, there are few such videos out there doing this and only one online journal (that I know of) that publishes peer-reviewed videos (of mostly medical research methods). What’s amazing to me is that there are not more such journals in this age of the internet and electronic gadgets.
Many scientists seem to be still stuck in the 18th century when it comes to communication of science. We are following a model that was developed long before digital cameras, computers, and the internet. Scientists initially communicated with each other through letters and eventually journal articles. We carry on this tradition and try to describe our methods as best we can in writing. Obviously, much of this information could be much more easily and accurately conveyed visually. Now that we have easy access to electronic gear that can capture video and audio and to inexpensive software to edit it into a coherent instructional video, I wonder why more scientists are not taking this obvious step?
Part of the answer, of course, is the perception that such an effort will take time away from the real communication of science (written articles) or would require an expensive film crew. There is also perhaps a reluctance to try a different medium of communication…a clearly non-traditional medium and one that is not going to count toward tenure. This perception may be changing…gradually. A few journals are encouraging authors to submit videos showing their methods, and a few scientists are complying. I think, however, it will take a dramatic change in how we view science communication before the scientific community embraces the idea.
I’ll have more to say about this in later posts. For now, you might like watching this TED talk by Chris Anderson who describes the coming revolution he’s termed, “Crowd Accelerated Innovation” (note his comment about science communication at 10.43 min):
The rule of thirds is a well-known principle of photography that generally leads to well-balanced and more interesting images. Most photographers know about the rule of thirds, but it’s easy to forget this concept when shooting video. If you look at amateur video (or photos), you will notice that the videographer often centers the subject, which is not very interesting composition-wise. By following the rule of thirds, however, you would place your subject quite differently in the frame and may even prompt you to be more creative in your shooting.
Although you don’t have to follow this rule (or any rule, for that matter) in making your videos, it can be a useful guide in capturing well-composed footage, especially if you are just beginning and are unsure how to set up your shots. By following the rule of thirds, your videos will look more professional and will be much more pleasing to the viewer.
In this short video, I describe how to use the rule of thirds to compose your shots so that they are visually pleasing (for best viewing, select the HD version and full-screen options (see menu bar at bottom of player window).
I’ve been describing my experience “field testing” my iPad and the iMovie app to make videos. I attended a scientific conference last week and conducted a few interviews. I found shooting video with the iPad to be somewhat awkward–not at all as easy as with a camcorder. However, it was possible to get decent footage, which could be directly recorded into an iMovie project.
The awkwardness was partly due to having to hold the iPad with both hands to keep the image steady. But the main problem I had was in conducting interviews and holding the iPad in such a way that my subject could look at me while talking. I should explain here that it’s best to have the person being interviewed not look at the camera, but at you. This approach produces a more natural conversational aspect. Also, the interviewee is often intimidated when asked to speak to the camera. This is particularly problematic with the iPad because it’s difficult to see the camera lens, which is very small. I had subjects nervously ask me where they should look and seem very relieved to be told to look at me and basically talk to me in giving their answers to the questions. So it’s a good idea to prep your subject before filming to encourage a more relaxed, conversational setting.
In case you are wondering how my field test worked out, here is the finished video:
This is the final post in the series describing how to use the iMovie app for the iPad. In this tutorial, I cover how to view your finished product, how to make copies, and how to share your project with the world.
I hope you’ve enjoyed this series and will let me know about any projects you complete using the iPad. In the future, I will be looking at other movie editing programs for the iPad as well as the iMovie 11 version for editing with your computer (for best viewing, select the HD version and full-screen options (see menu bar at bottom of player window).
