Using Actual Video

Just let it all out, buddy. You're among friends here.
Post Reply
DataPhreak
Met Resolume in a bar the other day
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 22:03

Using Actual Video

Post by DataPhreak »

It seems like universally, everyone mixes geometric animations, computer generated music visualizations, and occasionally, video of someone dancing. While this is very clean looking and is easy to match to the music and lighting, I prefer to use actual video and or cartoons, anime, music videos, etc.

I understand there are concerns of copyright. But when you're matching it to the music, blending it with other video, morphing it, does it not fall under the same fair use laws that protect DJs when they sample audio from commercial sources?

Are there other reasons you don't use regular video? Technical or visual considerations? Dictation by venue?

User avatar
flik
Is taking Resolume on a second date
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 22:35
Location: Regina, Canada

Re: Using Actual Video

Post by flik »

You can try https://archive.org/details/movies for tons of public domain movies and videos. Then you have no worries over usage.

User avatar
DHoude
Hasn't felt like this about software in a long time
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 14:12
Location: Manchester, CT, USA

Re: Using Actual Video

Post by DHoude »

There are several Music Video DJ pools too. I have been a customer on VJ-Pro for years. They are all licensed for public performance (non broadcast) as long as your venue pays ASCAP, BMI and SESAC royalty fees..

DataPhreak
Met Resolume in a bar the other day
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 22:03

Re: Using Actual Video

Post by DataPhreak »

Great considerations on the copyright front. Still, at the biggest parties, most of the time all I see on the screens are osciliscope/waveform rendered graphics, with maybe a mirror effect. Ususally, there'll be some particle generation in the back ground, etc. From a frame rate and pixelation perspective, you will naturally get better results from a procedurally generated source than from a video. But it just looks so generic though. Half of the stuff I see looks like a suped up version of the old school WinAmp plug ins. Not to knock winamp plugins, I got my first gig showing a resident how to work winamp manually. Sure, flat geometric visualizations are great for asymmetric projection mapped screens like what TAS does. (I want to lick his brain) but for flat square screens, it seems lazy to me. Other than manipulating blending and effects, there's not really any jockeying being done. To me, that's like a DJ that wipes back and forth between two auto-beatmatched tracks and just adds phasers, echo, or other effects.

Post Reply