"Instagram for Video"

Ok, I usually don’t write about video other than commenting on YouTube because (a) I’m inherently biased and  (b) I don’t want my opinions to be taken as representing the view of my company. But…. since there’s so much heat around the question of “Instagram for video” right now, here’s a quick thought on why photos and videos are very different.

Think about the photos you look at in either your social feeds or specific photos sites: 99% of them interest you because the subject(s) and/or camera holder is someone you know (or you yourself). Because pictures are static, you can also grok and scan them very quickly, meaning the “cost” of a bad picture is low, hence you are interested in pictures from a wider variety of friends. The other 1% of pictures are not interesting to you because of the subject matter (flowers! eagles! antique doorknobs!). Various products are changing this split but I really don’t think it gets past 90/10. [Of course there are photo buffs who just love to spend hours on Flickr browsing hashtags but that's not what's driving Socialcam and Viddy installs. And I'm not talking about photos which are incidentally included in news stories - eg the Tebow picture you see when you go to espn.com]

Now, about videos. It’s the other way around. In 99% of the videos you watch you don’t know anyone in the frame. You watch because the subject is interesting (and if it isn’t, you bail pretty quickly). Why? Because there’s a much higher cost to watching a video. Of course hours of video are consumed every day, so I’m not saying people won’t watch videos, I’m saying the “social” in video is more about the subject and then sharing or discussing it with friends. Think of it this way, the average video has ~24 frames per second, each of those is a “picture” – i don’t mind seeing a single picture of my friend and his baby in my Facebook stream, but I wouldn’t want several thousand in a sequential slideshow. That’s what a video is. Again, various technology and products are moving this from 1/99 –> 10/90 but I don’t believe this fundamentally means I want to see more personal video from a broader range of friends.

Note: at mobile scale, 10% of the “video” market is still HUGE so I’m not saying that any of these apps are necessarily flashes in the pan. I don’t know how to explain their recent spike, although I believe it has much more to do with Facebook distribution/feed changes than an inherently viral nature of personal mobile video creation or in-product network effects.

Off the cuff thoughts – where am I wrong?

32 thoughts on “"Instagram for Video"

  1. I agree. Another thing is that shooting, processinG and uploading videos on your phone kills the battery. This is a reason enough for me to not use
    Mobile vid apps.

  2. Pingback: Video Killed The Instagram Star | TechCrunch

  3. Pingback: Video Killed The Instagram Star – TechCrunch | My blog

  4. Pingback: Video Killed The Instagram Star | Crowdfunding News

  5. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool | TechCrunch

  6. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool | Lord of the Net

  7. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool - Entrepreneur News | Australian Society of Entrepreneurs

  8. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool - TRAIKA

  9. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool – TechCrunch | Newspaper Today

  10. Pingback: My Internet Press » Video Killed The Instagram Star

  11. Pingback: My Internet Press » Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool

  12. Pingback: Video Killed The Instagram Star | Techno Alchemy

  13. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool | Tasty Bytes News

  14. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool – TechCrunch | My Daily News Update

  15. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool – TechCrunch | Biggy News

  16. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool – TechCrunch | Biggie News

  17. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool – TechCrunch | Big E News

  18. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool – TechCrunch | NewsSupplyDaily

  19. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool | AkimoLux.com

  20. Pingback: The Capitals™ – Capitalists' Magazine | 資本家札記 | Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool

  21. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool | Crowdfunding News

  22. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool

  23. Pingback: Video Killed The Instagram Star | Networld Interactive

  24. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool - TechCrunch | Mash Mush

  25. Pingback: Opinion: Instagram Now Has Video!? | Android Kenya

  26. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool | Tableta

  27. Pingback: Video Killed The Instagram Star | Tableta

  28. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool | CB Smithwick

  29. Pingback: Video Killed The Instagram Star | CB Smithwick

  30. Pingback: Video Killed The Instagram Star – TechCrunch | Forex Newsline

  31. Pingback: Instagram Wanted To Be “Instagram For Video” Before It Was Cool » |

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s