okay so what to do with clipnote?
the submission can include audio, but the render has to be an image or a gif without the audio?
isnt it ... better then, to ban audio from the submission?

or wldnt it be better to either disable renders (force everyone to download the entry and listen to it in order to vote properly) or to allow mp4 renders for this format?

i think the current situation is not optimal

hmm, would you say clipnote is a bit like the mappist format in that regard? mappist renders tend to be screenshots of the level, but is not the level itself (e.g. look at the zquest entries)

i guess the difference here tho is that theres this guaranteed expectation that the mappist render isnt 'the entry'? we know its not 'the entry' because the entry is something we experience (via play, etc).
perhaps the render - in this case - is just.. a 'map' of the mappist entry, not the actual territory

in this context, i feel like clipnote is nearly similar (with its renders removing a dimension of experience, the same way mappist^[1] does), but its more ambiguous here, e.g.:
*the render lacks audio, but the entry Could have audio.
*the render lacks motion, but the entry Could have motion.
is this where the issue is?
- - - -
1. something worth noting is that this can likely apply to other formats, too? like html & tic80 renders likewise omitting the interactive element of its entry (assuming the entry is interactive), or, a slightly absurd example,, bytebeat renders not playing for infinite duration(?)

mp4 renders would be awesome, I don't know if this would be easy to add it as a botb feature. Meanwhile, I agree with sean, you got to experiment it yourself or see a possible render upload outside of botb (like on youtube for instance)

Like what Sean and Opilion said, a lot of other formats have additional caveats that can only be achieved through downloading the file, such as with the Game Boy format and custom GB roms. For those cases, people usually just state in the description that downloading the file brings the full experience to their entry, which I think would still work here.

An mp4 upload would be awesome, but that would be pretty consuming on both storage and performance, I imagine. Maybe give the ability to submit an image render and an optional audio render in the form of mp3 that syncs to the gif?

keep reading this bulletin title as "chipotle renders"

MP4s are smaller in size than GIFs.

i agree - mp4 would be ideal. plus, that could make for other formats that require video submissions. could be neat to create a format for something like content creation or video editing or something.

was gonna start a thread about this after the major, but it's good to go ahead and talk about it anyway! definitely not optimal rn

on one hand, i had the same gut feeling of maybe we should just disallow audio in this format, but on the other, audio was a notable component of the format that clipnote is trying to emulate, so it feels more in-spirit to allow it.

which leaves us at either the suboptimal current place we are (upload a separate youtube video?), or request a new render type, and i'm also wary of creating more work for our benevolent overlord.

the only upshot is that MP4 renders would open the gates for better mappist renders and for new formats .. video format, even compressed as it'd have to be, could be really fun in botb's distant future...

i don't request that lightly, but i do see it as the best option!

hmm I just had an idea that may be a good compromise, why not adding .zip as a valid entry file type ?

• If your entry doesn't contain audio, it's business as usual, you can upload an image render
• If your entry has audio, submit a .zip archive containing both your clipnote file and a .mp4 render. You can still use the "official" render on your entry page to upload a picture overview of the entry as it was explained above.

We live in an audiovisual world and consume audiovisual stuff daily. So, it would only be natural to treat a format that allows both graphics and sound as an "Audiovisualist" format. But this specific situation feels tricky because formats are generally classified as belonging to strict classes (Grafxicist, Chipist, Mappist etc.) and never as a combination of art forms.

By that logic, it feels like we should judge Clipnote entries mostly based on their visuals (given that it is currently classified as a Grafxicist format), much like PDF is classified as a Writist format and entries are mostly judged by their text, despite PDF also allowing graphics.

What I'm gathering here is that visuals are essential to Clipnote, but audio isn't. This doesn't means audio should be banned from the format. It only means that it is optional.

@Tex i agree with all that!

it's a very good point that the audio component is optional - and even the animation component is optional, you could just draw something and leave it there.

i was thinking that the format isn't necessarily beholden to remaining Grafxicist forever just because i started it that way, but given the variation we can have from the optional things, it's probably still best in that class.

it's also very true that other formats which cross boundaries like pdf or musescore have their focuses placed on one primary point; the visual component, then, would be clipnote's.

i still think it'd be most ideal to have a fresh render type to capture the whole entry, again doubly so for the mappists of this world... regardless of where the format's focus should be.

i'm glad you brought that up too - basically my plan after the major closed was to start some "state of the format" threads and clipnote was going to be one of them. i'd love for us to figure out what's best going forward; this was an experimental major after all, and a substantial portion of this was me making calls because calls needed to be made at the time. but i shouldn't have the final say in all that, in the end.

opilion: imo this is not a good practice. its similar to when people upload zips with an mp3 render for their lsdj entry...
it just takes twice the space and is redundant.

and tbh, i think a lot of people wont go the extra step to download and extract a zip only for the render - they can easily just open the actual file in its respective program if they already do the extra work.

tex: valid point, its never easy to classify formats and how they shld be represented and what their scope shld be. but there are already entries which use both audio and visual and i think the render shldnt just ignore 50% of the entry entirely.


after reading everyones posts and especially considering that mp4 seems to be smaller than gif (i didnt know that lol), theres no real reason why mp4 shldnt be the render type. i think?