AMV Meta-Review #44: AMV Critiques

[Szwagier]

When commenting on videos the org community, in general, focuses on technical aspects so much that we ignore the editors intent and any artistic issues. I think this has noticeable side effects in how new people or outsiders to the org view us. It'd be nice if those who give detailed critiques would focus less on technical things like video quality or how an effect was done and instead talk about the overall video.

As a side note, it'd also be nice if those who go 'thumbs up'/'it sucked' and that's it would provide a bit more detail.

While I agree that artistic is in the long run the most important factor of the AMV, it's the technicals that can make it work, or can make awsm idea into a barely watchable vid. Commenting on technical part alone is pointless, but commenting on how the technical part affects the overall feel is IMHO normal part of any opinion. And quality is also one of the factors that affects how the vid is viewed. And different people will have different reaction when watching the poor quality vids - the opinions are always subjective, so you can't tel someone that they can't comment on the quality, because it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter to you - but perhaps it does matter to them, therefore it is important factor in their opinion.
And while editor's intent cannot be completely forgotten it's vid we're talking about, not how the editor wanted the vid to be. I can give praise for the idea, but if it's poorly executed, then I still won't like the vid.

On the other note writing about technical is simpler. So surely there is this type of commenters, who don't know what to say about the overall feel of the vid, and talk only about the technicals. But that is a bit of a byproduct of the opinion system, which by expecting the scores for technicals also favors them.

About the small 'I like it' comments - they are nice, but wasn't the quick comment function invented for them?

[Warlocket]

And it is unlikely that those individuals will give any sort ofserious feedback regardless. Let alone write a full blown opinion or participate in -review. This is hardly addressed to those people. It's addressed to the regulars on the org that do take the time to do so. If you're taking the time to read this meta-review thread and actually forumlate a coherent reponse, it's addressed to you.

I've been complaining for years that the op structure does not have an "emotional impact" category. I call it "heart." I usually include a "heart" rating of my own in videos that really moved me or hit me. More later. Short break at work. Will be home in a few hours.

What I mean is that (in most cases) those kind of viewers seem to be the main source of the two word 'you rock/you suck' type of comments that godix mentioned, because they don't even bother to look at what really matters in the video. Yes, this probably will go unread by the people guilty of leaving the two word comment but I felt like speculating.

[Kionon]

...but wasn't the quick comment function invented for them?

Yes. And it was arguably one of the poorest decisions ever made by the admin team.

I you guys, but seriously. It's enabling the lazy more than we need to.

[Autraya]

my 2 bob's worth,
From what I've seen on this site a significant portion of the editors want their ego's massaged and constructive crit is dismissed out of hand/ignored or in some cases even laughed at, then when people decide to be blunt and truthful(the 'truth' as they see it) because the softer subtle appoach is falling on deaf ears it starts flame wars. Naturally they start for other reasons too, immature nerds living at home with their parents who have low self esteem but large ePenis' and ego's they like to wander the information highway with. Personally i got sick and tired of sugar coating stuff and I'm now like a 2"X4" to the forehead ego's be damned.
So although it may offend people my opinions are not personal attacks just the un-fructose laqured world as i see it, at least people know where I stand. Some days i forget myself and rediscover tact but they are few and far between.
I had a good laugh at godix' criticism thread(I forget the name) because many of those who posted cant take any sort of crit themselves, which just makes me think people are blinded to their own self delusions which is the point of being self deluding -_-

Now that i went completely off track I have to say;

It should be honnest, know when some tact is needed and sometimes a bitch slapping is required even if you seem a monster, if you think something is terrible then say what you feel but also say why, none of this "if you haven't got anything nice to say blah blah" if we only say nice things people rarely hear anything except their own horns tooting, I also think that much of the amv review has been too "nice" with sheeple following the more experienced editors opinions instead of being thier own person.
In closing the "feedback" system needs a shake up but how exactly I haven't give much thought... due to having a live

[Autraya]

alas poor Yorick for I lack an edit button:
everyone will stand on 1 side or another orsometimes in the middle of the road hoping for a bus or semitrailer on technical vs "artistic", in the same way that art is in the eye of the beholder so is personal opinion. and nothing short of "hitlers youth program" for members (or hatter) will ever unite the ever shifting human element

[Knowname]

I never liked qcs either really... but I must admit, it does have it's place. Just don't take them so seriously. In fact, on second thought, I wish they'd take them out, so all the youtube rejects will just stop. It is nice to get a qc every once in a while whereas you NEVER get ops except when a video is new.

it'd also be nice if those who go 'thumbs up'/'it sucked' and that's it would provide a bit more detail.

aaaaaaaaaaand we get back to that pesky ayumix problem (did ya see my video about it?? ;p). Most of those comments are made on announcement threads. Personally I'd rather keep it that way. It's just not good etiquette to go all medeivel on every noob video's ass IN THAT FORMAT. Now if you want to do that in an op or in a pm than go ahead, just make it private! No matter what you think, we don't need virtual public execitions here.

[Autraya]

It's just not good etiquette to go all medeivel on every noob video's ass IN THAT FORMAT.

I Brain thee!!

[evilspider]

Really interesting topic. Thanks to quadir for inviting me.

I'm not the org community resident, so it was kind of big surprise for me just to see that there's truly exists some intelligent side on org (I mean all amv-reviews in general, not just this thread) where videos can be discussed not only based on boring popularity factor.

Maybe it will insult someone's feelings, but from my point of view org always had a lack of intelligence regarding all aspects of videos estimation, because of orientation mostly on viewer's audience (OP system, VCA, almost everything here is made in interest of incompetent crowd of people, not the AMV creators themselves). So, I don't really believe that good concepts and artistic videos will be ever competitive on org. The crowd always liked more simplefied ideas, popular sources, pretty technics and shiny visuals. And they are the boss here, after all.

P.S. Not that I really care about org's problems (I have my own AMV community to care), but I'm truly sympathize to all creative and artistic authors who destined to be always underestimated on org.

P.P.S. And that's just my opinion, of course. I don't need another holywar.

[Warlocket]

I once saw potential in the QC function...

The anonymity of it seemed like it would encourage truthful comments and the fact that it was quicker to use would mean you were more likely to at least get SOME feedback since OPs seem to come few and far between (for me at least).

...Shows what I know.

[Ingow]

I've been complaining for years that the op structure does not have an "emotional impact" category. I call it "heart." I usually include a "heart" rating of my own in videos that really moved me or hit me.

Yeah, see, I don't get why this should be a category because that would imply that the other stuff is just as important when it's not. I watch a video mainly because of the heart of it I mean when it comes down to it all of the users here do. They say or think that "hey I liked that because it's in 1408x1234 resolution and had fancy rainbow effects" but in reality that's just their kind of heart. I mean where's the difference between someone that likes a video because it's romantic/touching and someone that likes it because it's got pretty colors?

It's all about priorities yes, but every individual has different one's. And seriously, you go to a con and you see anime fans and then you show them a painting by Van Gogh and a cute kitty cat that says "I u" in macro text and you can guess which they'll prefer looking at. This isn't about how godix wants to remind people on focusing more on the less technical side again, godix just wants people to stop looking at pictures of cute kitties and that's just never gonna happen.

My point is that instinctively individuals will focus on their own priorities when commenting on something they saw first. So when they go on all about the technical details I really doubt that it's because of "the difference between how art lies in the eye of the beholder", I don't think even 5% think that much when giving out AMV feedback.