Video email update: can you embed them?

Latest posts | Feed | By Mark Brownlow on September 08, 2008

There are three alternatives when it comes to putting videos in email: the embedded code, image and embedded file approaches.

Embedded code

In this approach, the email includes a few lines of HTML which calls or fetches the video file to display and run in the email itself. Much as you might embed a YouTube video in a blog post or web page.

Pros: People can view the video directly in the email. But since the video file is stored elsewhere, the email itself is still a small file: it downloads quickly and takes up no space.

Cons: Well, nearly all the major email clients and webmail services will typically block videos from playing this way. See, for example, these images showing how a Flash movie displays (or not) in Outlook, Thunderbird, Gmail etc.

Image

The image approach is the current best practice:

You put the video up on a website.
Then you take a screenshot of the video player in action.
Then you code your HTML to fetch and display this screenshot image when the email is opened, and link it to the web page where the actual video is available.

Pros: This is much safer than the embedded code approach, since images are much more likely to be displayed than video files. You can also be fairly imaginative in how you present the video and encourage people to click on through.

Cons: Images get blocked, too. However, there are tried and trusted solutions to the image blocking problem, most notably adding a text link below the image and using alt attributes in the HTML. See here for more details.

[It's not clear if these two techniques can be applied in the case of "blocked videos," since blocked video content does not degrade gracefully or relatively uniformly in the same way that blocked images do.]

Embedded file

The third approach is to send the entire video file along with the email.

A while back, I reported skeptically on a case study which suggested that embedded video worked. Unfortunately, we didn't know what the author meant by "embedded." Embedded code or embedded file?

Reader Anna Yeaman from graphic design and photography studio Style Campaign kindly took the trouble to find out and report back. The answer was "embedded file."

In this post, she goes into detail describing how you might embed a video file directly in an outgoing email, and she catalogs the results.

As you might expect, some (but not all) important email clients and webmail providers don't support the embedded video Anna used. But when they don't, they still display an associated image and link.

Which suggests this approach offers the best of both worlds: in-email video, but a backup solution if the file won't play.

However, while this looks intriguing from a technical viewpoint, there are practical considerations to worry about. Anna draws out the many pros and cons of the approach herself in the above post. Some additional thoughts...

Sending huge video files might entail significant bandwidth costs for senders
Not to mention how recipients might react, especially when not on fast, desktop office connections
It's not clear how this might affect deliverability
If you're going to send massive emails, they have to be worth the wait for the recipient: there's a bigger onus to provide value with the video
Might this have most value for small B2B lists or more personal B2B messages?
There is some indication that embedded code will work more often in future for certain types of certified emails. In which case embedded files would lose their attraction.

But I'd be intrigued to hear your thoughts on the whole concept...

Tags: video emails

[This post brought to you by Campaigner Email Marketing]
Permalink | Add to del.icio.us | 5 comment(s) - add yours!
Get posts like this: as an RSS feed | as a biweekly newsletter

Sign-up for the Email Marketing Reports NEWSLETTER
Twice a month, free, packed with email marketing advice and all the posts from this blog.

5 Comments:

Thanks for putting this together.

The only option I'd recommend to my team would be (2), the screenshot option.

The cons for (1) and (3) outweigh the pros.

Wonder how long it will be until (1), embedding video, will be a viable option? Ever?
By Tom Buchok, on 08 September, 2008

Thanks Tom. My understanding is that Goodmail systems are going to include video code functionality (i.e. option 1 above) sometime soon as part of their CertifedEmail program. (See this article.)

I don't know when they will start or how many inboxes will be covered by the program...
By Mark Brownlow, on 08 September, 2008

We used to do this in the older browsers but newer browsers put a stop to a smooth way of doing this. Now WrapMail suggests putting a still picture in the wrap and embed a link to where the video is hosted - a click will launch that page an play the video.
By Rolv E. Heggenhougen, on 08 September, 2008

Thanks Rolv: another vote for the screenshot approach.
By Mark Brownlow, on 09 September, 2008

I would go with video links, such as you tube and the such. This would keep bandwidth at a low, as embedding the actual video in an email can almost more than double the size of the email itself. It is better to save your $ than to go over on your bandwidth and pay your ESP overage charges.

I agree with Tom and others. Stick with the screen shot option!
By Vip Patel, on 19 November, 2008