Yet another hybrid ebook format

[darryl]

This link is from the Morning Coffee section on Nate's blog, the Digital Reader,

From eBooks to cBooks – new eBook format combining the best of book and film in an exciting new story platform.

I cringe every time I read about some "exciting" new format which is going to revolutionise reading by creating some bastardised hybrid of existing formats. In this particular case we have the cbook, short for cinematic book. Basically an ebook with significant length mp4 videos after every chapter which are integral to the plot. It seems the narrative links the video clips.

I should mention here that the cbook is not technically a new ebook format at all. Apparently the video is embedded in the ibook version, but in the Kindle version utilises links to the video, so is presumably meant to be read whilst online. Presumably it is a kf8 or kfx ebook with the links to the relevant video clips. There would seem to be no obstacle to embedding video clips in epub3 files, but it is unclear whether the book uses embedded video or links on other platforms like Kobo or Google Play. Amazon and Kobo pages for the book show a warning not to buy it unless you can view video on your device.

In my view this is no revolution, simply yet another marketing exercise. Basically, the Monsoon Tide as a cbook started with the finished feature film. It is no surprise that one of the benefits of the format is, to quote;

Although we have secured sales for our film Monsoon Tide, the cBook gives another income stream while promoting the film at the same time. Win-win!

Further justifications for the need for this "new format" are tenuous to say the least. For instance:

In our view, e-books are, for the most part, merely replicating conventional books in an electronic format.

Yes. Of course they are. This is what I want as a reader, and I'm sure I'm not alone. As a general rule I don't want my reading experience "enhanced". It doesn't need enhancing.

The article goes on to say that because of this, ebooks "are losing market share to the old style print books." Which of course is quite simply not true.

What we have here is neither a new format nor a revolutionary one. It simply links text narrative to video clips, just like many web pages. It is in my view basically a conventional ebook with hyperlinks (or in the case of IBooks at least, embedded video). Marketing disguised as revolutionary innovation.

[Terisa de morgan]

When are these people going to catch that.. ebooks are for readers, people who like reading, I don't want videos, I don't want MP3, I only want to read.

[DiapDealer]

Does anybody seriously worry about the text-only, novel-type of ebook going away? I sure don't. As such, I don't care in the slightest if people want make/read hybrid books that contain multimedia. It's no skin off my back.

[IronChaim]

Agree - not a new format at all. If anything, somebody thinks they're clever for inviting a new name to do something that's already supported. I'm chalking this up with the other 'push a single feature' campaigns - what was the one company that pushed adding 'sound tracks' to the book?

[Apache]

Apache

[ZodWallop]

This isn't a new concept at all. The very stupid Level 26 trilogy did exactly this back in 2009 (though their name for the concept, 'digi-novel' was more aggravating than 'cinematic book').

[darryl]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Does anybody seriously worry about the text-only, novel-type of ebook going away? I sure don't. As such, I don't care in the slightest if people want make/read hybrid books that contain multimedia. It's no skin off my back.

I agree with you. I don't object to them doing this nor to anyone reading/watching these books. If one really interested me I would go so far as to read/watch such a creation myself. Just as I might play a game I liked, listen to music or watch a movie. If there is some particular work which is best presented in this way, go for it.

What I do object to is the continual presentation of very mundane applications of existing technology as revolutionary for purposes of marketing. What I believe we have in this instance is a simple promotional tool for the movie which the movie makers hope will not only be cheap but will actually make them some money. In the process they use that tired old meme that readers must crave more from an ebook than a simple electronic version of the text.

[bgalbrecht]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Does anybody seriously worry about the text-only, novel-type of ebook going away? I sure don't. As such, I don't care in the slightest if people want make/read hybrid books that contain multimedia. It's no skin off my back.

If it means the ebook costs more than the equivalent paperback, I'm against it. I'm against anything the publishers want to use to justify the increase in ebook prices, except maybe an increase in author royalties.

[Dutchbook]

Originally Posted by darryl

What I do object to is the continual presentation of very mundane applications of existing technology as revolutionary for purposes of marketing.

What is the alternative? "We got something new to offer!" vs "This is just the same old same old" is really no contest from a salesman point of view.

It would be like the grocer telling everybody his bananas are rotten; you can't expect that from him.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

If it means the ebook costs more than the equivalent paperback, I'm against it. I'm against anything the publishers want to use to justify the increase in ebook prices, except maybe an increase in author royalties.

I'm not following. What paperback could possibly be the equivalent of a multi-media ebook? And new-release ebooks from major publishers already cost more than paperbacks. Are you suggesting that a handful of multi-media-titles are somehow going to drive major publishers' text-based ebook prices higher, too? I'm just seriously having a hard time following how anybody who is against multi-media ebooks (and would never buy one) believes they're going to be affected in any way by multi-media ebooks existing, or being sold. Do you worry that your favorite authors will be forced to "media up" their books by their publishers?

Multi-media ebooks have been quite possible for a long, long time now (with existing standards/technology). They're clearly no threat to standard novels (e or p).

[shalym]

Originally Posted by Dutchbook

What is the alternative? "We got something new to offer!" vs "This is just the same old same old" is really no contest from a salesman point of view.

It would be like the grocer telling everybody his bananas are rotten; you can't expect that from him.

I absolutely WOULD expect the grocer to tell me that his bananas are rotten. A grocery store that sells rotten bananas isn't going to do very well...

Shari

[Apache]

Originally Posted by shalym

I absolutely WOULD expect the grocer to tell me that his bananas are rotten. A grocery store that sells rotten bananas isn't going to do very well...

Shari

If he is doing his job he would pull the spoiled bananas, or any other produce, every morning before the store opens. I very rarely buy vegetables and fruit from Wal-Mart. For example, most of the root vegetables look like they have been in cold storage for to long.
Apache

[Deskisamess]

Tell you the bananas are rotten? Shouldn't he be removing the spoiled produce from the shelves?

Packaging over-ripe bananas for quick sale is one thing. But if they are rotten, then need to be disposed of.

As far as the topic of the thread goes...I've seen Kindle in Motion books being talked about. I've no interest in stuff moving or playing in a book when I'm reading. Some people like such cutsie pie additions, I do not.

Everyone seems to be jumping on this bandwagon, news sites are now full of videos, with very little text. I for one don't want to watch a video, I just want to read the news story. I can read much faster than people can talk, not to mentioned the jumping spinning crawl crap that is splashed on the screen at the same time.

[crich70]

To my mine text and video are two different things. You don't read a video nor do you watch text. You read text and watch a video. The two things are not interchangeable.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by crich70

To my mine text and video are two different things. You don't read a video nor do you watch text. You read text and watch a video. The two things are not interchangeable.

Yes they are. The key argument here is are reading text and listening to text the same thing?
Oh and my uncle would have to listen to a book or a video. He would just say whether a book was good or bad.