<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Audio For Video</title>
	<atom:link href="http://photofocus.com/2009/11/04/audio-for-video/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://photofocus.com/2009/11/04/audio-for-video/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:39:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The dSLR HD Video persuasion &#124; iamBrian.net</title>
		<link>http://photofocus.com/2009/11/04/audio-for-video/#comment-19586</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The dSLR HD Video persuasion &#124; iamBrian.net]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 01:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://photofocus.com/?p=7007#comment-19586</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] While looking at example work that people have been sharing on the internet, I realize my first priority. Sound. It&#8217;s to be expected that the camera will deliver good results as far as looks go, as long as the person behind the equipment has an idea what they want to do. However, it seems like many of the nice looking visuals are matched by very poor sound, which in turn gives the overall product an incomplete feeling. Another issue is relying on audio that is not copyrighted by the creator, but that is a separate debate that plenty of other people can have for me. (See here.) [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] While looking at example work that people have been sharing on the internet, I realize my first priority. Sound. It&#8217;s to be expected that the camera will deliver good results as far as looks go, as long as the person behind the equipment has an idea what they want to do. However, it seems like many of the nice looking visuals are matched by very poor sound, which in turn gives the overall product an incomplete feeling. Another issue is relying on audio that is not copyrighted by the creator, but that is a separate debate that plenty of other people can have for me. (See here.) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

