AMV Meta-Review #44: AMV Critiques

[JudgeHolden]

You do have valid points, but it's slightly different for art, no? People that strive for degrees in art are the type that will accept artistic analysis - people that don't are more likely to see artistic analysis as a heaping pile of bullshit filled with jargon that's made only to make it's proponents seem smarter than everyone else. This being the reason most "average joe" types don't frequent art museums.

Trust me ... many, if not most, "artists" I have met and known do not take artistic analysis of their work very well ....

[Emong]

good stuff

We're talking about somewhat different things here, or the way I see it anyway. I'm just bothered by people who put works in this certain "art" category, as if the work being "art" would be automatically better, as if it would bring it some value, which makes the work better. "This is art, that other one is not. Therefore, the one that is art is better, even if you like the other one better." Makes no sense to me.

I don't know what art is (except that I've accepted that it's subjective) so I'd rather hear some definitions instead of going by preassumptions. However, I like your approach on videos, since I tend to prefer those kind of videos myself as well, though I'm also fine with more abstract story-telling (which, I think, you included in your definition anyway) Call that art if you wish =) However, I was talking about art as a value, not like a description of certain type of works. And what I'm not getting is art as some value..

[Kionon]

You do have valid points, but it's slightly different for art, no? People that strive for degrees in art are the type that will accept artistic analysis - people that don't are more likely to see artistic analysis as a heaping pile of bullshit filled with jargon that's made only to make it's proponents seem smarter than everyone else. This being the reason most "average joe" types don't frequent art museums.

Slightly off-topic, but I struggle with sharing this as an English teacher sometimes. Especially with kids who don't want the other kids knowing they're an "artistic type" for fear of being seen how you suggest many proponents of literary and artistic analysis are seen. If they go to deep into an issue in the text, they risk teasing and alienation. Korean kids are, by default, so very quiet, and almost frighteningly self-policing, that it's often a battle just to get the most basic analysis out of them.

Are you suggesting the org is the same? I could find it believable, but I think such a fact would only strengthen my points, and demonstrate the need for those of us in this thread to take the initiative to demonstrate that analysis is "good shit, yo."

[Fall_Child42]

"This is art, that other one is not. Therefore, the one that is art is better, even if you like the other one better." Makes no sense to me.

Thank you you summed up one of my points without me having too.

I'd rather hear some definitions instead of going by preassumptions. ..

impossible you will get no definition because no definition exists.

the ONLY person artistic analysis benefits it the analyser because they would be able to pinpoint why they like something.

Other than that the assertion that the oil painting of sunflowers is one of the best paintings ever made is JUST as valid as Joe Shmo's thought that he would prefer to look at the velvet Elvis.

[Kionon]

good stuff

We're talking about somewhat different things here, or the way I see it anyway. I'm just bothered by people who put works in this certain "art" category, as if the work being "art" would be automatically better, as if it would bring it some value, which makes the work better. "This is art, that other one is not. Therefore, the one that is art is better, even if you like the other one better." Makes no sense to me.

Oh. Right. No. I look at videos the same way I look at many different technically complex fields.

Architecture is a great example. Usually, it's both technically proficient (concept is, I need building, can I use it? Sure!) and artistically meaningful (is this a piece of "art?" Does it have beauty and emotion? Can I get something out of it by just looking at it? Sure!).

You can have entirely artistic productions (UT's bridge to nowhere on the East Lawn for example. You can't walk on it. It doesn't go anywhere. But it's beautiful) in architecture.

Or you can have entirely technical productions (my apartment building in Ilsan. It grey, it's ugly, it looks like every other apartment building for miles. But it's comfortable, the plumbing works, the floor is heated, I have a great mini-kitchen... I can use it to live in) in architecture.

It would be stupid to ask what practical concept UT's Bridge to Nowhere serves, and as equally stupid to suggest that there is a deeper meaning in my apartment building.

[JaddziaDax]

I tried to read I really did. I got through most of the posts.. I'll itemize on the things I did pick up on:

Heart Category:
as for the "heart rating" I don't usually make that a "category" when leaving an opinion, but I will put a blurb at the end of how the video impacted me emotionally... Sometimes this is overwhelmed with technical stuffs cause I couldn't get past that stuff to actually even attempt to enjoy a video, sometimes its filled with warm fuzzies or sheer hate, or seizures. I don't think it really needs a score rating though.

Leaving long detailed constructive criticism vs "you rock/suck":
Beta Testing:
If asked I tend to give a lot of highly overly detailed feedback during Beta Testing (you should have moved this cut here to there at 0:23 to 0:25, I don't think this scene fits with the mood you are building find something else to put there.. Try this and see if you like it... I think these scenes would give a bigger emotional impact... etc.) This is given with a note of "This is just an opinion, you can take the advice or leave it, in the end it's your video and you have to make the decisions on weather or not you like these ideas". And I'm not offended when people don't like my ideas either.

I will go through the video second by second and write notes on blocks of time. I reserve this kind of feedback for people who ASK me for it. I also appreciate this kind of feedback when I'm closer to filling my timeline (or when I ask for it). Very rarely have I ever seen this kind of feedback given in the op system (though it does happen some times). I really don't see this kind of feedback as very useful after a video has been "finished" unless they plan on remaking the whole thing, but it's highly useful during beta testing.

The closest I've ever seen in the ops system was I got this op from this guy trying to see the metaphors in a FMA/Greenday video me and my friends made, which was actually a really interesting read because he saw things I never really thought about.

On Announcement Threads:
This is the place I will usually just leave short feedback, I don't know what kind of feedback this person is looking for, and if all they want is a short "ego stroke/bashing" then there is no point in me wasting my time writing out long detailed op to them.. it's a waste of my time to leave more than initial impressions unless they ask for them.

In the op form:
I will leave the standard "a bit in the good box, a bit in the bad box, and in general explanations as to why I scored the way I did + a bit on my feelings on the video" I find that this is the medium that works well for the form... Unless someone wants more than that and tells me that a detailed opinion on their video, I have no reason to write more, once again it could very well be a waste of my time to leave more than that.


Giving Vs Receiving:
I find that there are issues on both ends because people don't really communicate what kind of feedback they would like, and if they do they are mostly very vague about what it is they want.

As a personal preference I'm pretty vague about what kind of feedback I want because I actually like all kinds. If people will take the time to write out long critiques then I am willing to read them. I might poke fun later but that doesn't mean that I haven't read/absorbed what they said.

Technical Vs Artistic:
Currently I tend to receive a balance of the two for every "it's too saturated" I get I also get a "your concept sucks/rocks". Though with every video and getting closer to getting the technical aspect right I also tend to get more of the artistic crit, because there is less and less to say about my video/audio quality, they gotta find SOMETHING to say don't they? lol

Personally I see nothing wrong with telling a newbie to improve their technical aspect part first because once they get the "basics" down they can then go on to improve in other areas as well.

If we are going to compare this to art, we can go on about how we don't start out painting masterpieces but start out with drawing stick figures and working our way up the scale... just about every good classically trained artist has gone through and started with the basics. IMHO the same can be applied to AMVs.. The technical aspects of an amv are the "basics" and if they want to work their way up to artist they gotta start somewhere.

Blasting them from all angles can overload them. Which is why I tend to take things "step by step" when dealing with some of the newbs. I poke and prod and see if my advice is getting through, and if it is then I go on to another step. If it doesn't then I'll usually give up because they aren't "here" to improve and get advice they just want to put cartoons to songs. There are people out there that just happen to like drawing stick figures for fun, even though they know they can't draw any more than that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Other Comments:
What I don't like is the assumption that feedback is REQUIRED... either you are required to give it or receive it.

There are those out there that just like watching and don't really want to be involved. My friend Eric who got me into amvs is like that, he's been on the org way longer than I have and hasn't given a single piece of feedback to any one on this site (cept when I forced him to beta for me that one time).

There are also those out there that expect that just because they put an amv on here that means that they will be flooded with opinions (of any kind: ego stroking, the crit kind that give advice, etc.).

Opinions (in any of the forms) are OPTIONAL. No one is required to give or receive them. I understand people wanting more community involvement but not everyone is out to get that.

[Fall_Child42]

(UT's bridge to nowhere on the East Lawn for example. You can't walk on it. It doesn't go anywhere. But it's beautiful) in architecture.

Or you can have entirely technical productions (my apartment building in Ilsan. It grey, it's ugly,

see this is only your OPINION, other people might like the grey utilitarianist style, and reject wastes of money like the bridge to nowhere

neither is better or worse from an artistic standpoint (except in the eye of the individual), but from a technical stand point they are, and that is why people focus on technicalities.

[Knowname]

Things not to do: "you suck", "u fail" or whatnot. If you feel this way, tell them WHY and be really descriptive.

lol that just makes me laugh -_- if your putting somebody down you think being DESCRIBTIVE about it will HELP anything??? lol

The great thing about criticism is, that someone might approach your work in a way you never thought about. When working on stuff, artists tend to get tunnel vision a lot of the time. You want something to be really well done, and you spend so much time on one aspect that you might overlook others. Criticism brings that out. Therein lies the importance of beta testing, I beleive. Even if you don't change your original idea, somebody might present an idea that gives you an idea on how to make it cooler or perhaps points out something that does not work as well as it could.

Even if the person looking at your video has no technical skill or knowledge in video editing, they may still see something they just don't like. And if they do, don't go "oh, well you don't edit, you wouldn't know" Try and understand their point, it might be a good one.

I find beta testing pretty pointless in most instances... I mean, whatever floats your boat, if you can change your mind when someone says 'I don't get it' than that's you, but I can't do that. If someone doesn't get it I don't really care, I just wanna know if there's some stupid technical mistake somewhere. Now in the actual op of the finished version (as I rarely release finished betas) I care if someone doesn't get it, but not before it's even done. SO from my aspect- beta testing- technical (maybe a touch on artistic, but really, how are you SUPPOSED to take 'I don't get it, just scrap the project and start from scratch'), opping- artistic. If you think about it you might come to the same conclusion (fat chance though... I am VERY weird in how I think lol), beta and opping are to VERY different things, you should take different tacts on them. I know in my case, I HATE to get technical comments on my op, like 'the AR is wrong' I don't CARE if the AR is wrong, I'm not gonna go through the export again! And vica versa, in my betas, I hate to get artistic comments, like 'just scrap it dude, there's no feeling in it, it sucks, in my unfinished betas. of coarse the feeling's not there, it's unFINISHED, it's too early to fall in love ;p, I find that the ppl who tell me that tend to like the finished product, so I just ignore it...

CRITICISM is your BEST FRIEND. GET OVER YOURSELF

lol again, have you even looked around? Criticism is a harsh thing to take, and making it anonymous (via QCs) is even WORSE. No, criticism isn't bad, but regardless of the intent, too much is too much and thus comes the reason qcs must die. I mean, who's the one that's too big on themselves, the one that can't take criticism or the one that just won't stop?? Seriously, we don't need another hero so stop trying to be one.

[BasharOfTheAges]

You do have valid points, but it's slightly different for art, no? People that strive for degrees in art are the type that will accept artistic analysis - people that don't are more likely to see artistic analysis as a heaping pile of bullshit filled with jargon that's made only to make it's proponents seem smarter than everyone else. This being the reason most "average joe" types don't frequent art museums.

Slightly off-topic, but I struggle with sharing this as an English teacher sometimes. Especially with kids who don't want the other kids knowing they're an "artistic type" for fear of being seen how you suggest many proponents of literary and artistic analysis are seen. If they go to deep into an issue in the text, they risk teasing and alienation. Korean kids are, by default, so very quiet, and almost frighteningly self-policing, that it's often a battle just to get the most basic analysis out of them.

Are you suggesting the org is the same? I could find it believable, but I think such a fact would only strengthen my points, and demonstrate the need for those of us in this thread to take the initiative to demonstrate that analysis is "good shit, yo."

I'm suggesting that people in general (and many of those here) don't buy into artistic analysis as being any more valid that pure opinion, but they do think of technical analysis as fact. They see critical, harsh "opinions" as flames and critical harsh analysis as "facts" and therefore different. There is something to this. If someone's being critical of your work and they provide solid facts it hurts less than the same reactions with pure opinion - to someone with a scientific, analytical mind at least.

[guy07]

When it comes to reviewing amvs, most of it is taste. Some people take stuff like synch for granted, some are synch nazi's and some ignore it all together. Some people love effects, some hate them. Some people are seizure video addicts, and some people flame the people who make those vids.
So it's hard to have a discussion on this subject ... so as per usual i have nothing important to say on the subject . >.>;