I've been going back and forth on this for a while so I'd like to know some people's thoughts on this one.

When putting videos on your own website, do you personally perfer using YouTube as your source, or using Flash and inserting them from your own server?

I understand the various pros and cons.

With Your own vids, they stay on your site and don't get the chance to wander off (as you know, clicking on the vid will take them to youtube), they're not subject to youtube "maintenance" and some believe it looks more professional to not have the youtube logo there.

With Youtube as your host, they load very fast, take up almost no room on your own storage, and allow them to be seen by possibly a wider audience and it's compatible with almost everyone who uses internet faster than a dial-up modem (which is almost everyone in recent years) and, due to YouTube's widespread popularity, some clients are more comfortable viewing videos they know aren't going to compromise their systems.

Obviously with my lists, I'm leaning more towards using YouTube, but I really want to hear others' thoughts on this.

Thank you kindly in advance for your intelligent, well-thought out responses.

For me the pros of youtube far outweigh the cons. Especially the ease of it for someone who is technically challenged like I am. I'd like to know what helps SEO more. This is a fascinating subject to me and there seems to be differences of opinion on it. But from what I've heard a youtube or google video increases your SEO ranking more. In fact, if you do it right, someone doing a google search may even find your youtube video , thus finding you, that way. That is why it is important to put your contact information right on your video.

Another option is to do both.

I put my video onto Google Video, and I also had it put on my website in Flash. The Google Video isn't on my website at all, but there is a link to my website from my video online at Google Video (can be a part of doing SEO for your website).

I preferred the Flash version, because I didn't want to have ads for Google or YouTube on my website. I felt it just looked more professional. It looked like I could "afford" to put the video on my own site.

- Donald

Personally, I always think flash versions look best. You can decide the size and quality, have a player that matches the layout of your site, etc. Combining Dreamweaver and Premiere Pro makes this very easy. Although I do think that a section of your site should have the demo available in multiple formats (mainly for agencies). Check out http://www.KevinVinerMagic.com/Promo-Kit.aspx to see what I mean.

I prefer a combo approach.

First, I encode to Apple's H.264 Quicktime codec, formatted for mobile devices like the iPhone.

Then I use a Flash player to play this file (thanks to Flash being able to play H.264 content).

So now, instead of having a WMV, FLV, MOV, etc., I have one file that plays on pretty much everything. And I can still have the Quicktime video show for those on Macs or iPhones by using CSS.

I prefer the H.264 codec due to its quality and file size.

And most web hosting options give us pretty much unlimited bandwidth, anyway, so why worry about bandwidth?

Its all about the branding.

I agree with Donald & Scott.

I used to embed my YouTube video on my website. Then I read another thread here a while back that basically opined that none of us are going to have a bandwidth issue from too many people visiting our websites and watching the streaming video. Therefore, hosting your video on another site to save your own bandwidth became a moot point for me.

Also, it came to my attention that some businesses and schools block sites such as YouTube, and in doing so, prevent your video from being seen. It is for this reason that I convert all of my video to .swf flash files and host them myself.

My 2¢

Chris

I edit mine then compile an mpeg file. You can upload this to YouTube. The upload will take an hour or more. The benefit is that the viewer will get the option to select the high quality version (which will take longer to load, but will be very good quality).

Flash videos are great because they start quickly (whereas the visitor has to wait on wmv files to download).

I'm not so keen on the idea of putting YouTube videos directly onto a website. Think it might depend on your target market. If going after a corporate decision maker, or another higher level market, using YouTube videos on your site might not be the best idea.

For those niches, putting a YouTube video on your professional website is somewhat similar to passing out business cards that say on the back, "Free business cards from VistaPrint".

For some, it can be interpreted along the lines of, "I'm not yet successful enough to have enough space on my server for Flash videos", or "I don't have the money to hire a professional website designer." You shoot yourself in the foot. When it comes to closing a sale, and getting hire paid bookings, don't skimp.

On the other hand, if your target market are birthdays, VFWs and the like, then YouTube seems a great option.

Definitely agree that having a separate account on YouTube is a plus. Brings in traffic that you might not otherwise have.

As a web BROWSER my personal preference is embedded YouTube videos. I hate weird formats, for example I have trouble with whatever format Jay Sankey uses on his website.

So... that would be a vote for Flash, then?

Very good debate folks. Seems like the vast majority favor Flash as opposed to a youtube video. This is certainly not the first time I’m in the minority! However, I don’t think anyone has answered my question.



Is there a difference?

I LOVE when it's posted as an embedded Quicktime (H.264 is usually best) because I can save the video to my desktop (with Quicktime Pro). Then I have it for reference and can show friends without having to connect to the internet.

Youtube videos are cool, especially now that they have an HD option. I will admit that I almost always end up wondering and clicking on related videos once I'm there.

I just asked a motivational speaker friend of mine who uses embedded youtube clips for his website videos if he has had any problems with some businesses blocking youtube and he confirms that it is a big problem. Thanks to Christopher Starr for pointing this out as I did not think about that.

Additionally I think it does look more pro to stay away from youtube although for some I can see it is a more practical option for various reasons and might be the best option in some cases.

My webmaster is about to put some new vids on my site and I am going with a flash player.