Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Recent Viral - YouTube Compression

A

Alex Veitch

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2009
Messages
118
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
UK
Website
www.alexveitch.com
Hi All.

<LINK REMOVED> to a recent online piece that I shot with my Scarlet. Are there any tips for avoiding the compression artefacts? I'm guessing it might be to have a less severe grade (the raw footage is all completely clean) but this was the look desired.

Cheers

Alex
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZnbzovY3Os
 
Last edited:
Higher bit rate is about all you can ask. I never deliver via YouTube so I can't say how they support data rates but Vimeo allows up to 19Mbps on upload for 1080 material. Any web video will be disappointing in the end but the higher bitrate in (within reason) the better the result. That's the easy answer. The hard answer is that services like Vimeo & YouTube will re-compress your video to their specs. For TOTAL control, host yourself but remember, they do it that way for a reason!
 
Hi Michael

All good to know (although nothing that comes as a surprise)! Unfortunately this one is obliged to go out via YouTube by the client and so the production company had uploaded a high bit rate version. At least I know we've done what we can in the circumstances.

All best

Alex
 
Pardon my skepticism but my point is this: no one can plan for a viral video. Pretty much by definition, viral indicates an outlier. If you are promising your clients a viral video you are going to disappoint them more than 99.9% of the time - because the odds are against you. It's like an investment advisor telling you the secret to getting rich is buying a stock at $1 and then selling it 3 weeks later at $100. Possible? Sure. Likely. Not very; minuscule odds.

Yours is a good case in point. It has now been well over two days and you have 1347 views. Not bad but hardly viral. On this forum, most of us are filmmakers of some sort. It seems much more honest to post here that you have made a piece and would like others to check it out for quality and creativity. When you have 39 posts here and bill your video as "viral" it feels, to me, like a blatant attempt at manipulation; like a troll.

Of course, you'd like your clients to get a lot of exposure but that isn't what this forum is about. We aren't your audience, we are your peers. Trying to trick people into being curious about what made yours "viral" is just so much hype.

Just my opinion, of course. :smiley:

EDIT: P.S. - I sound skeptical because, well, I am. Often.
 
Last edited:
Terry VerHaar said:
Pardon my skepticism but my point is this: no one can plan for a viral video. Pretty much by definition, viral indicate an outlier. If you are promising your clients a viral video you are going to disappoint them more than 99.9% of the time - because the odds are against you. It's like an investment advisor telling you the secret to getting rich is buying a stock at $1 and then selling it 3 weeks later at $100. Possible? Sure. Likely. Not very; minuscule odds.

Yours is a good case in point. It has now been well over two days and you have 1347 views. Not bad but hardly viral. On this forum, most of us are filmmakers of some sort. It seems much more honest to post here that you have made a piece and would like others to check it out for quality and creativity. When you have 39 posts here and bill your video as "viral" it feels, to me, like a blatant attempt at manipulation; like a troll.

Of course, you'd like your clients to get a lot of exposure but that isn't what this forum is about. We aren't your audience, we are your peers. Trying to trick people into being curious about what made yours "viral" is just so much hype.

Just my opinion, of course. :smiley:

EDIT: P.S. - I sound skeptical because, well, I am. Often.
Click to expand...


I used to work for an almost-Fortune-500 company. For a year and a half, it bugged the hell out of me that our department kept getting asked to make "Viral" videos. "We need a viral video." "How long will it take you to make a viral video of [X] product?"

Then, I suddenly realized something. Every single time that someone outside of the media department used the word "viral" in relation to video content, what they meant was "a video that goes on the internet." To most, "Viral" is both a viewing space, and a genre. "We want that 'viral' feel." Meaning lower production value, like fans are making it because they have such a love of the content, and offbeat humor. They absolutely wanted the video to spread and spread by people sharing, but that wasn't what they actually meant by using the word "viral".

I very much agree with you, Terry. But for me, the word "Viral" is like the word "Hacker": most of the people that say it have no idea what the word actually means.
 
Okay, so maybe I should have phrased it as online video? But frankly, big deal - its was a request for advice/assistance that I made when I had seen the online version, in view of the compression I saw. One member gave that, for which I am grateful. Personally I don't see the value in the more skeptical responses - perhaps the reason for my low post count is that if I have nothing of value to say in a thread, I tend not to say it.
 
Can I get a moderator to change the title of the thread to "Online video - youtube compression"? Perhaps that would help.
 
alexveitch said:
Okay, so maybe I should have phrased it as online video? But frankly, big deal - its was a request for advice/assistance that I made when I had seen the online version, in view of the compression I saw. One member gave that, for which I am grateful. Personally I don't see the value in the more skeptical responses - perhaps the reason for my low post count is that if I have nothing of value to say in a thread, I tend not to say it.
Click to expand...

Because RedUser has become more and more a place for people to pitch-their-stuff and less and less a place for people to get-and-give-help. And to some, it's irksome.

Your original post could be seen as "I WANT PEOPLE TO WATCH MY VIDEO AND MAKE IT GO VIRAL but I'll act like that's not what I'm doing by asking a legitimate question." I'm not saying that's what you did, I'm just pointing out that's what a quick glance at the thread could convey.

I will also point out, that there are quite a few threads on this very thing over in the Workflow section. A topic on compression is not limited to Scarlet, or even the Red cameras themselves. However, it is dependent, in part, on what software and overall workflow you have access to/are using. Hence, looking around Workflow, or even starting a topic in Workflow if you can't find what you're looking for, could garner better responses and information.
 
Nick Pasquariello said:
Because RedUser has become more and more a place for people to pitch-their-stuff and less and less a place for people to get-and-give-help. And to some, it's irksome.

Your original post could be seen as "I WANT PEOPLE TO WATCH MY VIDEO AND MAKE IT GO VIRAL but I'll act like that's not what I'm doing by asking a legitimate question." I'm not saying that's what you did, I'm just pointing out that's what a quick glance at the thread could convey.

I will also point out, that there are quite a few threads on this very thing over in the Workflow section. A topic on compression is not limited to Scarlet, or even the Red cameras themselves. However, it is dependent, in part, on what software and overall workflow you have access to/are using. Hence, looking around Workflow, or even starting a topic in Workflow if you can't find what you're looking for, could garner better responses and information.
Click to expand...

Okay, I see that, but it was a question to my peers asking for advice, not intended to cause problms. Perhaps the mods can just delete this thread, since the entire focus is on terminology rather than the question I'd posed. Sorry to all for offence, problems, waste of time etc etc.
 
Haha - Alex, you are probably taking this way too personally but I sort of feel like you got caught at the game you were playing and now you are indignant about being called on it. It is hard for me to believe that you can make a sophisticated marketing video, post it on YouTube, call it viral and yet be so naive as to not understanding the terminology of your claims, i.e. "viral."

For me, it's an issue that I hate being "gamed" and am always willing to challenge someone when I feel that's what they are doing. If 90% of the folks on this thread - or 51%, for that matter - agree that your question was an innocent one, then you should just ignore me; I am an outlier. As an aside, I have to be honest and say that I think the product you are pitching is completely bogus and unhealthy, which probably doesn't make me want to buy you claim.

In any case, to me, you seem smarter than all that and I am not going to buy the feigned innocence. LOL When you claim viral video, next time make sure it is before to tout is as such or you end up looking a little foolish. Again, IMO.
 
Nick Pasquariello said:
I used to work for an almost-Fortune-500 company. For a year and a half, it bugged the hell out of me that our department kept getting asked to make "Viral" videos. "We need a viral video." "How long will it take you to make a viral video of [X] product?"

Then, I suddenly realized something. Every single time that someone outside of the media department used the word "viral" in relation to video content, what they meant was "a video that goes on the internet." To most, "Viral" is both a viewing space, and a genre. "We want that 'viral' feel." Meaning lower production value, like fans are making it because they have such a love of the content, and offbeat humor. They absolutely wanted the video to spread and spread by people sharing, but that wasn't what they actually meant by using the word "viral".

I very much agree with you, Terry. But for me, the word "Viral" is like the word "Hacker": most of the people that say it have no idea what the word actually means.
Click to expand...

Could not agree more. I have sat in meetings with marketing VPs and they have asked me to produce a "viral" video for them. Haha. Sure, I'll get right on that for this completely staid product that you also are giving me no real creative autonomy to produce. Every time I heard the word, part of me would die inside. I would start to daydream about the list of MBA buzzwords that must be handed out in first year marketing. Blech.

Then, like you Nick, I came to the conclusion that people were attaching various meanings to the term. Hmm. Am I Mac McMurphy, or Nurse Ratchet? Am I simply mentally divergent? Haha. I always wonder when things go too far, will "you're" actually start to mean "your" seeing as the bulk of the country cannot seem to capture the meaning.

Anyway...this is quite irrelevant. Sorry. :jacked:

:)
 
Terry VerHaar said:
Haha - Alex, you are probably taking this way too personally but I sort of feel like you got caught at the game you were playing and now you are indignant about being called on it. It is hard for me to believe that you can make a sophisticated marketing video, post it on YouTube, call it viral and yet be so naive as to not understanding the terminology of your claims, i.e. "viral."

For me, it's an issue that I hate being "gamed" and am always willing to challenge someone when I feel that's what they are doing. If 90% of the folks on this thread - or 51%, for that matter - agree that your question was an innocent one, then you should just ignore me; I am an outlier. As an aside, I have to be honest and say that I think the product you are pitching is completely bogus and unhealthy, which probably doesn't make me want to buy you claim.

In any case, to me, you seem smarter than all that and I am not going to buy the feigned innocence. LOL When you claim viral video, next time make sure it is before to tout is as such or you end up looking a little foolish. Again, IMO.
Click to expand...

Remind me never to ask for your critique on anything, Terry. I'm totally kidding - as I feel you are...for the most part. Hahaha.
 
Terry VerHaar said:
Haha - Alex, you are probably taking this way too personally but I sort of feel like you got caught at the game you were playing and now you are indignant about being called on it. It is hard for me to believe that you can make a sophisticated marketing video, post it on YouTube, call it viral and yet be so naive as to not understanding the terminology of your claims, i.e. "viral."

.
Click to expand...

I wasn't playing a game - I shot the video, didn't post it, and considering my normal amount of views it probably is viral. But yes, I used the wrong term, I should have just put online video. I put a post because at the time I'd just seen the online version, and I wasn't happy with how it looked. My client was the production company,they were the ones who posted, I wanted to see if the online version could be improved. I'd hardly be trying to promote my work by saying "hey, I'm not happy with this, it needs assistance" which is basically what I did.

Anyway its a shame I didn't get the same level of response into answering a question I posed rather than picking up on semantics!
 
Many of my clients use the term "viral" for a quick, straight-to-web video. Nothing to do with views. It's fairly common in the music and advertising industries.

Alex said nothing wrong here. Some of you clowns need to stop trolling the forums and go find a job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top