In an effort to promote my short,
Middle of Nowhere, I've uploaded it to every prominent video sharing site I can think of. Two of these have a reputation for featuring short films and have been around for awhile--iFilm and Atomfilms.
Atomfilms, which pays filmmakers for accepted works based on traffic, had my upload for about a week before saying no. I was disappointed by this (who doesn't want to make a little back on their investment?), but not very surprised. After seeing a film with a similar idea recently go live, they probably felt my piece was beating a dead horse. The full details of my theory can be found in this
previous post.
What startled me about
iFilm (where I first saw internet sensations such as
405), was how quickly
Middle of Nowhere was posted. The site said that it was up for review, but soon thereafter was available for public viewing.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2423f/2423f702c3046c3fd7de291c3cfd8acc8b431e25" alt=""
This makes me wonder if iFilm has felt the pressures of other sharing sites like
YouTube, and is adapting in order to stay alive. Their content no longer seems geared exclusively to artists, but is filled with viral stuff that has taken over the internet as of late. They were acquired by media giant
Viacom in 2005, which may explain their shift in focus. I can't really complain, as my movie is now available in one more online venue.
It's interesting to note that for all the locations my movie is posted (which includes
YouTube,
Metacafe,
Vimeo,
Revver), the most feedback I have received comes from
Stage6, the sharing site that uses the DivX codec.
Comments