Re: [tdwg] Species pages and video

Just a few comments.

One possible solution to the 1080 issue will be (soon to be released, released?) Flash Player 9, which will support up to 1920 x 1080. It will not run in full screen mode at this setting unfortunately. It will be in H.264 format, as used in MPEG 4. FLV files are FLV files - which may not be the panacea everyone desires but it may allow some of the high-res content to get out in the wild, sooner than later.

The choice to use Youtube over Google was an easy one. Youtube allows one to embed the video in an html page, Google Video does not. My feeling is that the supplemental information surrounding the video can aid in familiarity for the user. The more images available to a user trying to make a determination of an unknown taxon, the better. However, Youtube, and Google for that matter, may (read will) switch to an ad based format. Ads appearing on/in vouchers are not appealing for obvious reasons. Scientific video services are coming into being - Sci-Vee, for one. Not sure whether they offer an embed feature, have emailed them and will hopefully know shortly.

Metadata - if anyone can send me a template that I can employ now, even something rudimentary, I will use it and re-post the species pages prior to the conference. The data are there/here.

Thanks to all on the list that have offered suggestions and solutions to clarify and improve the previously posted Carices pages.

Still working on clustering Google points and getting kml to run in Gmaps, Tim

Latest page with all recommended improvements so far-

http://utc.usu.edu/factsheets/CarexFSF/new/carex_oligosperma_species.htm

Richard Pyle wrote:

Thanks Bob,

I'm still waiting to hear back from them (Google) on related stuff (mostly concerning bulk uploading). I know they prefer that I upload the full-res version, even though they shrink it down when streaming. I'd actually rather them have the full-res versions, so that as future internet bandwidth paradigms allow higher-res streaming, they can automatically step it up without input from me. Of course, uploading a 178MB file compared with a 3.5MB file -- multiplied several thousand times -- is another factor that cannot be completely ignored.

The ideal would be a JPEG2K-ish standard as you describe with user-specified resolution. Rather than get Google to build another stand-alone app, I'd rather see them come out with their own browser with built-in support for Earth (and customized/optimized video streaming, Google Base access, Co-op features, etc.) all built in.

So far, no NDAs....

Aloha, Rich

------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Bob Morris [mailto:morris.bob@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Tuesday, August 28, 2007 5:34 PM
*To:* Richard Pyle
*Cc:* Eamonn O Tuama; Timothy M. Jones; tdwg@lists.tdwg.org
*Subject:* Re: [tdwg] Species pages and video

JPEG2000 video standards---which are generally mp4--- probably
address this problem, because JPEG2K can decompress at arbitrary
resolution, that is you can tell the remote server what resolution
you want the stuff sent at. I think, but am not certain, that this
would be the case for the video standards too, since it should be
doable frame at a time. Indeed, I vaguely recall a demo at a
JPEG2K meeting in which video was streamed at resolutions which
varied with time. There are lots of questions, but apparently few
answers, of the form "does Flash support JPEG2000.  Of course
rendering in the current browsers remains a problem if it doesn't,
though people certainly tolerate standalone Google Earth, for
example---so why wouldn't they tolerate standalone video viewers.
Ask your Google video pals what's up. Preferably not under an NDA.
:-)

Bob


On 8/28/07, *Richard Pyle* <deepreef@bishopmuseum.org
<mailto:deepreef@bishopmuseum.org>> wrote:


    Dear all,

    I've been meaning to jump in on this conversation several
    times, but I keep
    getting side-tracked.

    For over two years now, we have been developing a protocol and
    associated
    software tools (I use the pronoun "we" loosely as far as the
    software
    development goes -- that has been entirely the work of Rob
    Whitton) to allow
    us to harness the power of video for our scientific
    purposes.  We conduct
    surveys of coral-reef fishes in the Pacific, and the use of
    hi-definition
    underwater video cameras allow us to make dozens of "video
    vouchers" (as we
    call them) of fish species in the context of their natural
    habitat on every
    single dive (again, I use the pronoun "we" loosely, as John
    Earle is the
    primary videographer on our surveys).  Though perhaps not as
    ideal as
    specimens, the video is much better than in-situ still photos
    (especially at
    hi-def resolution), because it gives us multiple angles on the
    subject
    (increasing the probability of capturing that elusive but
    diagnostic small
    black spot near the anus), as well as behavior (which can
    sometimes aid in
    confirming identifications).  And it's a LOT better than just
    an un-imaged
    observation record. It also allows us to document many more
    species on a
    given dive than we could by collecting alone.

    The software that Rob Whitton has developed is optimized for
    field-based
    capturing of metadata.  We ( i.e., John) will generally
    catalog the video
    clips on the same day the video was taken.  Metadata is
    robust, with full
    locality/habitat data (including depth and other parameters),
    as well as
    rich content cataloging (multiple identifications of the same
    imaged
    organism, etc.)  At the moment, we (i.e., John & Rob) have
    something on the
    order of 7,000 video clips cataloged -- representing nearly a
    terabyte of
    video files (a mix of both standard-resolution DV and
    HDV).  Very soon we
    will have an initial website online to allow searching/etc.,
    and we have a
    couple of major regional checklists in the works that will
    cite these "video
    vouchers" in addition to more traditional means of documenting
    species at
    localities.

    So...the reason I am posting this now (rather than wait until
    the site is
    online) is to ask others who are exploring the use of video
    content for
    similar purposes how they plan to implement it.

    Our current plan is to maintain an archive of full-resolution
    digital video
    files on our local SAN, but the files are much too large to
    stream in
    real-time over almost any typical internet connection, and
    moreover would
    completely choke our bandwidth if the site ever became
    popular.  For this
    reason, we want to use a video hosting service to stream the
    content, which
    we will link to from our own web databases (which themselves
    will serve only
    keyframes from the clips).

    We've been working with Google to sort out a way to do batch
    uploads onto
    Google Video.  I generally prefer the Google Video environment
    over YouTube,
    but I'm not familiar with other video hosting services that
    are out there.

    Here is a sample clip:

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=153611051098248174

    Google Video allows me to dump all of the metadata into the
    Description
    field.  Unfortunately, this is not very structured.  However,
    Google Video
    allows you to link back to your own web page for each clip, so
    I can have
    that link go to an LSID resolver, or some other web interface
    where more
    structured metadata can be served.  Another feature I like is
    that you can
    lay as many subtitle/caption files as you want.  For example,
    if you go to
    the link above, in the lower right corner you'll see a little
    "CC" icon.
    Click on the drop-down button to the right of the "CC" button,
    and you can
    choose from any number of subtitle tracks.  In the example
    above, there are
    two different tracks: "Audio Dialog" transcribes the spoken
    words you hear
    on the clip's soundtrack, and "Species List", which names the
    species as
    they appear in the clip.  Rob Whitton is developing his
    software to
    automatically generate the text for the metadata and multiple
    CC tracks, so
    that we can (eventually) automate the upload process.

    The main problem -- which I think will be true of any of these
    video hosting
    services -- is the limited resoloution of the clips as they
    are streamed.
    For example, here is a frame from the original HDV clip in the
    above link:

    http://www2.bishopmuseum.org/testvideo/Frame01.jpg

    Here is the same frame at the resolution that the video is
    rendered on
    Google Video:

    http://www2.bishopmuseum.org/testvideo/Frame02.jpg

    Obviously, the full-resolution video contains a LOT more
    information.  The
    problem is that an MPG (i.e., compressed) copy of the
    full-resolution HDV
    clip is 172MB, whereas the compressed version that Google
    streams is 3.5MB.
    The problem is not with Google Video -- it's with the
    internet.  Most people
    will not have access to the badwidth necessary to stream video
    at the full
    HDV resolution.

    So...what we'd like is a service that will allow people to
    view the clips at
    a resolution that is reasonable to stream over the internet
    (Google Video,
    YouTube, etc.), but then have the option of downloading the
    full-resolution
    file (in this case, 178MB) if they want to see it on their own
    computer, and
    are willing to wait for the full download.  Obviously, we'll
    have to somehow
    regulate the downloading so that we don't choke our bandwidth
    -- but we want
    to allow people to have access to the full-resolution imagery.

    My hope is that Google (or whoever) itself would offer the
    service of
    streaming content at an appropriate resolution, but then
    allowing people to
    download the full resolution clip as a file, if they want
    (i.e., using
    Google's or whoever's bandwidth, and not ours).  But for the
    time being, we
    mostly see Google as a way to: 1) Manage streaming of video
    content at low
    resolution, and 2) increase visibility (through Google
    searches_ of the
    content we do have.

    Of course, the latter depends heavily on how well the metadata
    are fleshed
    out and structured -- which brings me back to Éamonn's post.
    Like him, I am
    very-much looking forward to conversations at the upcoming
    meeting in
    Bratislava.

    Meanwhile, I guess the main point of this message is to ask
    whether others
    know of analagous projects, and how they have dealt with issues of
    bandwidth, bulk uploading to video hosting services, and
    metadata structure
    and content.

    Aloha,
    Rich

    Richard L. Pyle, PhD
    Database Coordinator for Natural Sciences
      and Associate Zoologist in Ichthyology
    Department of Natural Sciences, Bishop Museum
    1525 Bernice St., Honolulu, HI 96817
    Ph: (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252
    email: deepreef@bishopmuseum.org
    <mailto:deepreef@bishopmuseum.org>
    http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/staff/pylerichard.html




    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org
    <mailto:tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org>
    > [mailto:tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org
    <mailto:tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org>] On Behalf Of Eamonn O Tuama
    > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 5:20 AM
    > To: 'Timothy M. Jones'; tdwg@lists.tdwg.org
    <mailto:tdwg@lists.tdwg.org>
    > Subject: RE: [tdwg] Species pages and video
    >
    > Dear Timothy,
    >
    > I think the use of video is valuable even if there is not
    > much motion involved - combining a series of stills with
    > voice over can be very effective - and the many video hosting
    > services makes it relatively easy to get online. However,
    > unlike text which can be mined for information, video (and
    > images) require good metadata to describe what the content is
    > about - to aid in searches, etc.
    >
    > Your species pages with their general facts and interactive
    > taxonomic keys span the task areas covered by SDD (Structure
    > of Descriptive Data) and SPM (Species Profile Model) TDWG
    > interest groups. I look forward to fruitful discussions
    > between the two at the forthcoming meeting in Bratislava that
    > will lead to standardised ways of marking up your species
    > content so that it is more easily discoverable, accessible
    > and re-usable (assuming permissions
    > granted) across what GBIF has labelled "The Universal
    > Biodiversity Data Bus".
    >
    > Best regards,
    >
    > Éamonn
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org
    <mailto:tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org>
    > [mailto:tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org
    <mailto:tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org>] On Behalf Of Timothy M.
    Jones
    > Sent: 10 August 2007 16:48
    > To: tdwg@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg@lists.tdwg.org>
    > Subject: [tdwg] Species pages and video
    >
    > Hello,
    >
    > I will not be attending the meeting this fall  but  thought
    > that this may be of interest to those interested in species
    > pages models.
    > I am working on species pages that include the use of video.
    > The videos were only added a month ago and are a bit
    > rudimentary (with budget-conscious equipment) but the
    > potential now seems truly limitless.
    >
    > Examples -
    >
    http://utc.usu.edu/factsheets/CarexFSF/new/carex_eburnea_species.htm
    <http://utc.usu.edu/factsheets/CarexFSF/new/carex_eburnea_species.htm>
    >
    > http://utc.usu.edu/factsheets/CarexFSF/new/carex_nebrascensis_
    > species.htm
    >
    > http://utc.usu.edu/factsheets/CarexFSF/new/carex_mitchelliana_
    > species.htm
    >
    > Comments appreciated,
    >  Timothy M. Jones
    > http://utc.usu.edu/keys/Carex/Carex.html
    <http://utc.usu.edu/keys/Carex/Carex.html>
    > _______________________________________________
    > tdwg mailing list
    > tdwg@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg@lists.tdwg.org>
    > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg
    <http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg>
    >
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > tdwg mailing list
    > tdwg@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg@lists.tdwg.org>
    > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg


    _______________________________________________
    tdwg mailing list
    tdwg@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg@lists.tdwg.org>
    http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg




-- 
Robert A. Morris
Professor of Computer Science
UMASS-Boston
ram@cs.umb.edu <mailto:ram@cs.umb.edu>
http://bdei.cs.umb.edu/
http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram <http://www.cs.umb.edu/%7Eram>
http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram/calendar.html
<http://www.cs.umb.edu/%7Eram/calendar.html>
phone (+1)617 287 6466 

---

---

tdwg mailing list tdwg@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg