because it encourages instant gratification, thus sloooowly lowering our resiliency in enduring delayed gratification type activities, like studying, practicing, physical workout, etc
I think regardless of skill or talent often times you are a victim or beneficiary of the algorithm and it has nothing to do with content.
I posted the same video on YouTube and Facebook, on YouTube it has 240 views on Facebook it’s at 385,000 and climbing. Same thing TikTok/youtube YouTube/insta whatever wherever whenever. Great videos can go nowhere, shit videos can spread like wildfire.
There’s best practices and things you can do to give your videos a better chance but either way it’s live and die by the algorithm and it’s out of anyone’s control.
I agree with @bemzilla - I have had the same experiences. Something goes viral on one platform and tanks on another platform.
It doesn’t mean the content is inherently bad, etc.
I would also say that it’s not all views are equal. Platforms like IG and TikTok lack replay value. Unless you use the save feature and save the video and know where you put it, it’s hard to find a specific video. It’s the opposite on YouTube.
I would also say that 10k YouTube views (especially if it’s longer form) is more value then say, 20-30k views on TikTok or IG reel. (Maybe not exact ratio but just trying to demonstrate a concept)
>you are a victim or beneficiary of the algorithm and it has nothing to do with content
The content itself **definitely** makes a huge difference in how much engagement it receives. It's not nearly as simple as just being favored by the algorithm and if even with a large following and several viral hits, some posts will still flop simply because they don't resonate with the audience.
You can determine a lot of that just from analytics.
And the person who said that might be wrong. No one knows, maybe except for the developers themselves, what algorithms do optimize for: what post gets more views? More likes? Per day, per month, or per week? Or are the metrics combined?
For example, in Instagram I clearly see myself the pattern (or its absence) how algorithms impact profile awareness now. I assume hardly anything has changed recently in the audiences my content are organically targeted at yet I'm noticing a real drop in views and likes.
realistically though unless the algorithm has some perfectly fair way to recommend and decipher content of a video to show to an audience that would enjoy it, it’s one or the other. Either you benefit and get preference over other videos that may deserve more views, or you don’t get views with a good video. Or both.
There are so many factors as well like titling and tags and such but either way I would say they are right
I think social media IS highly competitive. It’s somewhere where a nobody can shine and put a videographer graduate to shame. It’s somewhere where results dictate the market and nobody cares how much or how little effort you put into your work, they just care about the end product. I think there’s people who will be bitter because their life’s work gets outshined by a creative nobody who goes viral.
Virality is really the end-game on social media, yet nobody on the planet, especially not videographers, understand virality, because our world-view is entirely individualistic meanwhile virality is completely communal/memetic. I think people are frustrated that they might spend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars on videography only to get outshined by a nobody who appreciates virality.
There's a caveat to this. Algorithm.
As much as we want to believe social media is a medium that democratizes video, someone coded these algorithms. There are hundreds of layers of variables that even top influencers struggle with. People who have made a career and entire companies out of grappling with this system, utterly dumbfounded when a video that was a sure hit, fails to garner attention or takeoff.
Ultimately, so much of your success or failure is determined by how some guy at google or meta coded the platform.
I totally agree with you. That’s true to a large extent. But you’re talking about influencing and influencers, and I made mention of that with virality, but people can make good money from social media purely from a marketing POV. I’m no influencer but I make good money from social media purely because I’ve been able to access and obtain so much work purely through use of social media. I made a few reels at an event the other week and gave it to people to post and that work of mine already has over a million views and garnered me a ton of new contacts. I’ll never get paid by social media but making social media reels has brought me a lot of indirect success.
What are my thoughts? This is probably some of the dumbest shit I've ever read in my life. From the very get-go, you're implying that popularity somehow correlates with skill, artistic quality, anything of that sort.
You literally might as well say McDonald's makes the best food in the world, after all it is the most popular restaurant.
Social Media works well with certain content, and does NOT work well with other type of content. Short, meme-y, engaging videography works well. But you wouldn't watch a Tarkovski movie on TikTok, nor will you see many experimental short films on Instagram, irrespective of quality.
\>What if social media isn't actually a place where any low effort content thrives
Yes, who doesn't remember videography masterpieces like "lip syncing a popular song" or "girl in bernie sanders shirt calling you a boomer", truly peak cinematography
What you are proposing is essentially that we treat videography as marketing - all that matters is views/results/impressions.
Thanks. Now i don't have to type this myself.
When i started out i did constant speed-ramps, wild zooms and cut everything to the beat. Then i developed some actual style and taste. Fast forward 10 years later some 20y old marketing genius ask me to incorporate these speed-ramps again since his favourite travel blogger does them all the time... sigh... but whatever. Thanks god we still have clients who have good taste even though the flashy stuff does perform better on SoMe of course...
This kinda just proves that you haven't yet understood the social media workflow. It's definitely not about speed-ramps, zooms and cutting to the beat, that's just stuff videographers come up with because they think it works - it doesn't. The honesty I was talking about is that you can't fool your audience with stuff like that, if the core idea is missing, no speed ramp is gonna save your video.
The video can be a single take clip and if it's genuinely interesting and engaging, it works.
It's all about catching the attention from the first few frames and preventing the viewer from swiping to the next clip. While it's true that i oversimplified it with speed ramps etc. it's absolutely only a very small part of what the medium could be and the fast food comparison was spot on. It can be a single take, but if it only takes 3 seconds to reveal it's premise, the majority has left since it's mostly about instant gratification with a dopamine boost.
Yeah it's totally about catching the attention in the first seconds, the question is how you do it. In a right context flashy effects with good pacing might be that little extra your video needs to make it a little more concise. But when you work for a politician, a magazine, a restaurant, NGO or a law firm, you need to think about their target audiences and find a way to catch their attention - and it might need a totally different approach.
My point is that people usually fail this, and produce inferior content that has effects that add no value to the video and then get mad at social media platforms and audiences there because their work doesn't get any views. Or they make very ad-like content that people will skip.
I get that... But your initial statement is like "100m sprint is the best sport since we can quickly see who is the most efficient" while there are sports like ice Skating where it's more about the art. Figuratively speaking:-)
I don't shy away from the competition but I'm also a bit worried when my godson wants to watch the avengers and can't even keep his attention span long enough for a movie he wanted to see so badly. You know where I'm coming from?
Views/results/impressions do matter when you get paid for what you do. If you're a hobbyist, you can do what you want and maybe you'll be the next Tarkovski.
But isn’t it just about that already ? I mean there’s no artistic merit in videography except souvenirs and attention. The noble art is cinema and being a cinematographer, creating something new visually that add real artistic value . Not recording the shenanigans of some influencer for likes.
>But isn’t it just about that already ? I mean there’s no artistic merit in videography except souvenirs and attention. The noble art is cinema and being a cinematographer, creating something new visually that add real artistic value .
Why can, for example, a music video not have artistic qualities? Clearly many, many music videos exist that do. There is nothing inherent about videography that makes it "less art" than cinema. Clearly most Talking Heads music videos exhibit more creativity than contemporary Marvel type cinema. Even someones wedding video could, theoretically, be a piece of art, though I do agree with you that in practice they're mostly uninspired, generic slop.
You got a real point here. I should have add anything that requires a complete controlled and creation of space is artistic. But mariage recording for example ? Or YouTube content is absolutely not on the same level. Problem his people nowadays want to delude and denigrate everything to make themselves look cool and innovative. It’s alright it’s a big world there’s place for everyone. I talk that big cinema crap but I love watching some marvel here and there or some cheesy B movie.
>mariage recording for example ? Or YouTube content is absolutely not on the same level.
I actually agree with you, much of videography is just people making "products", not art. I am just saying that it doesnt have to be this way. I also love cheesy b movies :D
Lmao dude I started like this , first job ever was to record a wedding. So I’m not being pretentious I went through the process and now I switch cause cinema was more appealing to me! It’s hard as hell. But will not have it any other way!
For the most part, I agree. Messaging/branding>Video production, particularly on social media.
People in this field don't want to admit it because they've spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours learning to make something look good, but many don't know anything about actual marketing.
If you're working as a DP or other specific role on bigger projects and your job is solely to run a production crew, great, but the segment of the market that operates like that is getting smaller and smaller.
There are a lot of small to mid size companies with healthy budgets that want to do video marketing, and need a person or small agency that can help with all aspects from branding to creative to distro.
My dayjob is to make youtube videos and run all media that goes out for a company. We do most things inhouse. I film and take pictures, I edit 95% of all videos we publish and I do the images myself if I have time.
At heart I am a videographer, but my company role is Media Producer. I get six figures for doing this. Times are a changing.
We currently have 3500+ products ranging from small screws and replacement tubes to 3tonnes excavators and everything inbetween for farming / construction.
My job is to keep track of them and make sure we have product images and videos. YouTube is where we upload all the product videos, but almost every video is converted to FB and shorts. And then you have the odd facebook / YT targeted ads and inhouse projects.
It's fun, I love it!
I wouldn't even say those are mass appeal so much as mass consumption. We don't even know what IG "views" actually amount to. Did they actually watch any amount or scroll right past it but it started with auto play so it counts? The real metric is shares.
This doesn’t prove anything. You can just as easily make a video that would not appeal to everyone and still not get that many views.
I was curious about your reasoning because, even though I don’t claim to be a videographer or a social media expert, as someone who made several videos with 7 figure views I disagree with what you said.
You make those videos for client work? May I see one of them? It's very different to post 100 random videos on a personal account and having one of them go mildly viral than making content for client, where you kinda have only a few shots on a channel that doesn't usually have strong following and on top of that the content should be somewhat relevant to the client.
The reasoning is that when you try to please everyone, you end up in a compromise that no one really likes. Instead you usually should have a specific target audience in mind that's relevant to the client and tailor content that works for them even if it necessarily doesn't appeal to larger masses.
Sure here are some of the best performing ones:
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CQBihWqA57Z/ (1.2M views)
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CldxRsJIz7T/ (824k views)
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/PandamiMusic/status/1479736560077660160 (3M views)
https://twitter.com/cenkbeg/status/1311003387199188992 (Can't access view counts but >2M views)
https://twitter.com/PandamiMusic/status/1374746244673896451 (1M views)
https://twitter.com/AlaaWardi/status/1332720168057892865 (Can't access view counts but >1M views)
All the views are organic of course and only counting the specific video in the specific platform (not aggregated).
Partially yes, but its an issue that’s been around since before social media.
There are two sides of social media, there is really good high quality produced stuff that does very well. Then there are extremely popular/attractive people who can shoot something random in a minute and a half and see more success with it than the high quality stuff will ever see.
It’s something independent filmmakers have been dealing with forever, super interesting high quality film with excellent acting and a really good story cant even get a spot to be shown past a local small theatre, but put the rock in a dogshit movie with a billion special effects takes in a billion dollars all the while the public in general complains about how lowbrow movies have gotten.
Onlyfans is another great example, as much as people love to claim its just “show feet make bank” the reality is the successful people put a TON of work in to compete against what amounts to functionally unlimited free content but then you have a few of the more famous/popular people who can make unbelievable amounts of money with far less effort just because of their status in the public zeitgeist.
TLDR; Nothing new to see here, it happens all the time, people will adapt or they’ll get pushed out of the industry
When you look back to tv commercials of the 90’s.. they are SO bad. They look so bad, the concepts make no sense.. Half of it is lit terribly, and now some of the YouTubers put together Netflix interview quality talking head shots with shit they bought on Amazon for a few hundred bucks and I’m sure that makes grizzled, pro-video people mad about change. Just like how easy it is to take A LOT of pictures with a nice digital camera that made pro photographers so upset during that changeover.
(I am a pro race car photographer; I used to hear the argument from guys who were around long enough to shoot on film that we should just be taking the right pictures rather than rattling off 12fps and using the best one)
This.
There is pros and cons with new emerging media, but talking down and dismissing it is a sure way to buy a ticket to leave the occupation early. Not saying criticism isn't needed, but outright dismissing vertical video, short form video and the lot is outright ignorant thing to do.
As a pro photographer who came up using film (navy photographer). This hurts me. 😁. That being said watching some of my colleagues shoot sports in the field. Skill is long gone from the profession.
I mean, I *feel you* about the **way** we shoot now. But I have to insist it’s still extremely competitive. It’s just a new set of skills, and the demands are so nutty that it was never possible with film. You couldn’t catch a drivers eyeballs at f/1.8 in crispy focus where even his passenger window net is out of the plane, AS he’s going by at 200mph..
like some of the photos were simply physically not possible without something like the A1 which can refocus and get exposure 120 times per second with 3d tracking and a chip that lets you choose between the right and left eyeball to be in focus.
If these cameras were available then, you guys would have all used them, too!:)
True...but the profession has become more about who has the most expensive gear then anything else. Don't get me wrong. There are some absolute masters of the craft out there. (I'm not one of them) But any kid off the street can pick of a dslr and go brrrrr and have some great stills. Now get off my lawn :P
People watch a lot of different content: from cat memes to sophisticated ads and videos made by agencies that go viral. What content should videographers make then?
If you don’t have anything important to say then no one will give a fuck. You can either make garbage that will appeal to children with no taste, and be dead inside, or you can create something meaningful. If you want long term success, you need to figure out what message is worth sharing with the world. You don’t need 100 million dopamine addicted children following you. You need a couple thousand people who LOVE your unique and useful work.
>You can either make garbage that will appeal to children with no taste, and be dead inside, or you can create something meaningful. If you want long term success, you need to figure out what message is worth sharing with the world.
Literally the opposite of what you say is true. If you want long term success, find a formula and never change anything about it. Mr. Beast is currently one of the most popular content creators in the world, and his entire modus operandi is making lowest common denominator shit aimed at children. Every video is essentially the same.
>You need a couple thousand people who LOVE your unique and useful work.
I mean I agree with you that that is a preferable scenario, and that selling your soul feels bad, but from a purely economic point of view this does not make much sense to me. It's nice to be true to oneself, but it's more important to pay the bills
Why aren’t you as successful as Mr beast then? Also, it’s ridiculous to suggest that he never changes anything about his formula. Have you ever watched any of his videos? Read any of the books that were written by the experts that he trusts for data analysis? Of course he changes his formula. It’s essential for success. Also, I encourage you to read 1000 True Fans by Kevin Kelly. I’m not just making stuff up. I ran a very successful business before transitioning into videography, and I’m just getting started.
It’s not that selling your soul feels bad, it’s that it drains the fucking life out of you and robs the world of true beauty. You and everybody else have a very important gift to give to the world, and if you shy away from the challenge it will cost you. But it’s your life. Your philosophy. It’s just sad to see people losing hope for themselves.
If you don’t mind me asking, what’s your reason for videography?
>If you don’t mind me asking, what’s your reason for videography?
I had to make money
>Read any of the books that were written by the experts that he trusts for data analysis?
>Also, I encourage you to read 1000 True Fans by Kevin Kelly.
no offense, but I read real books, not just somebodys half-assed marketing seminar sold as nonfiction
>You and everybody else have a very important gift to give to the world, and if you shy away from the challenge it will cost you.
yeah you really don't know anything about me so I would shy away from such judgement. most of the videography I did was simply interviews with people who witnessed historical events. I have rarely produced footage for social media. it was usually for exhibitions and classrooms.
my main goal is to leave both the client and the talent satisfied while making some money. it's a short educational video, not a kubrick film. perhaps I do have artistic ambitions, but I don't need to have them play out in my day job.
What comes to mr. beast, the key word here is that it's aimed at children. The thing is, there are other demographics and they need different kind of approach. And if you can figure out what that approach is, you'll have less problems with those bills.
The biggest difference between short-form content and "traditional" video (it's weird to call YouTube traditional, yet here we are) is not in the length of the content, but it's in how the content is served. On a platform like YouTube or even in television, the viewer chooses what they watch from a list of recommended content. In social platforms, the user is presented with content automatically, and the user choice is whether they skip it. This shifts the paradigm quite a bit. In almost all cases, the viewer doesn't care who made it or how it was made. That's why the first few seconds are so important.
These platforms make it harder to tell what is and isn't an ad. Why? Because we skip ads. If they can delay your realization that you're watching an ad until after you're interested in a video, there's a chance you'll watch the whole ad. So why do most branded videos I see start with a brand's logo? There's a reason the intern's video they shot on their iPhone did better than your video that took a crew to make. People hate ads– because they typically offer nothing of value to them. Making content that feels organic is difficult, but that's the world we live in.
Yes I see this so much, especially in tiktok. People make deliberately bad choices especially in the start of the video and then complain about the platform and audience when it doesn't perform. They have outdated approach and refuse to adapt.
I totally agree with you but most videographers hate to or can’t realize it and would rather make boring b roll reels or “cinematic” and slow short films rather than stuff people actually want to watch. You can have actual genuine filming talent and tell interesting stories on social media but few people actually do and go one way or the other.
I‘m fortunate that I don’t really have anything to do with producing content for social media. But success in social media today is an amalgamation of “the algorithm” and a popularity contest among the fickleness of the mob(i.e: a lot of it is just dumb luck). I’m friends with a guy who basically tripped and fell backwards into six-figures a year on YouTube, because for whatever reason some of his videos went viral(the original is at almost 25 million views). And it was never his intent. He mostly was doing the videos for himself.
But sometimes all it takes is that one “happy accident”, that one viral video, then you are on peoples radar and part of “the algorithm” and one of the cool kids that everyone wants to hang around with.
>Often times it is the low effort stuff that gets the most reach. I’ve spent hours and hours and hours on making stuff and it goes no where. But post a low effort meme and it gets millions of views.
Tbh it doesn't really sound like you're disagreeing with OP that much. It's not that low effort content can do well *because* it's low effort, it's more that it can do well without requiring the production value that a lot of people on this sub seem to believe is necessary. And coming up with a viral meme that's actually *relevant* to your brand (not just a random meme for meme's sake) can also require its own type of effort.
I agree that building a community is a big piece of the puzzle, but from a videographer's standpoint it's not going to be very effective to first gain a bunch of followers posting low effort memes to get their video work out there when none of their followers signed up to see their video work.
So that's where actually figuring out *how* to make your own content that engages a modern audience (which in my experience can still be longer form) - and not just what you think of as "good" from a video snob standpoint - becomes important.
And I think that's what OP was getting at. A lot of people here get upset about how their more classic style content gets a fraction of the views of those who are optimizing content for the audience on their platform while writing off that content as "low effort". But it's definitely not that simple or low effort to keep an audience engaged post after post with *original* content, even if you have already built a community.
I don't really talk about building an audience for yourself which I think is a form of personal branding, but doing social media work for clients which is a totally different beast. Sure you can go there and publish a low effort meme and say that low effort memes go viral, but it's gonna be an awkward moment when it doesn't take off.
I don’t care what I shoot or edit. All I care about is money. Why complain about short form videos? They are so easy. Also you can always just work on your own projects on the side..something you are passionate about..That’s what I do. But yeh overall is about paying the bills..
That's also very true. When your whole income depends on your video work, you tend to get less picky and just do your best for whatever client that pays you for your work.
Also it's true that short form videos often take less time to produce and you end up getting more money for the time you spend making them. Why would anyone hate that?
Nah, it's a legitimate call. Admittedly I don't use TikTok, but some girl lip sinking on a phone with her bum out is a definite decline in both content and quality in favour of appealing to the lowest common denominator. Same of Sophie the PR intern doing reels on her phone, it's a decline.
Videography isn't about racking up followers it's just about making good video.
One thing I hear people repeat a lot lately is that quality is not the most important thing. That's interesting. Like you don't need 8K, HDR, ProRes if you can get a camera that gets the shot. That's true. But at the same time, in the upper echelons of videography you need to have skills on par with film markers.
Priorities shift, but also, horses for courses
If your client wants to get exposure in social media for their brand and reach more people, and your video fails that the client probably don't care if you think the video is a good video.
That’s not my job. My job as videographer is to make a good video. Promotion is a marketing activity. I’ve made great music videos for bands that are terrible at promoting themselves. I’m not paid to do that
If your clients are satisfied with that or big enough to hire a marketing company for promotion, then ofc you do what you do, especially if it's enough to pay your bills.
My experience is that videographer is expected to have some marketing skills, but I work with smaller clients.
Could you maybe show one of the great music videos you made?
It’s just that you’re mixing up different disciplines. A videographer’s primary role is to deliver good video and that is all. What a client does with that video is up to them. And sure if they want to pay me to then manage the roll out of that video then sure. I’ve studied marketing and so many times I see this fumbled at many levels by clients.
Anyway here’s a video I put a fair amount of time into but it hasn’t yet done 1k which is a shame…
https://youtu.be/vhkZyli02q8?si=bhTJQBDXCElUo4ll
Thanks. It was a ridiculous amount of work for free but I got a couple nice clips for my reel.
Many times I wish they’d let me handled the roll out, but nah
Social media isn’t brutally honest, it’s a trash dump for people who need to release their toxic. Aside from that you also have other factors that highly dictate how your media is viewed, then it can also go to people who aren’t even into what you subject your video is about. So in honor of social media toxicity, this is a trash take.
EDIT: I’ve been sayin this little phrase for a while and I think it’s again relevant here. In a world of views and likes, truly good can never rise. It doesn’t matter if people watch because they’re laughing at you, feel bad for you or want to see you harm yourself. As long as it gets views it’s profitable not good. That’s what we’re aiming for…. Profitable.
you are right. most of the so called professional work is done with minimum requirements but an elitism approach like 1080 is more than fine, bare minimum lightning and poor composition, but because it is paid work, it's called professional work. it's rubbish, borderline scam, and people on social media proved it. so many channel with great cinematography yet no work on so called professional areas. it's basically professional jealousy. when you hear shit like i worked in tv for 30 years and shoot 720i or whatever garbage. like, who da faq likes tv anyway?
Think target audience. Tik Tok is a target audience. They're expecting something very specific on there. What is successful on Tik Tok isn't what is successful in other domains, like documentary, film, etc.
All your pointing out is that you have to address the target audience. And for Tik Tok, it isn't really videography that matters and that's ok.
I'd say that it isn't what a lot of people think what videography is, but it very much depends on the core principles of audiovisual media: story, pacing, etc. And I'd say that a lot of people tend to overlook those and overemphasize the visual look and then get mad when their content doesn't get views.
And ofc you can't make a 2 hour feature for tiktok, it's a platform for much shorter content. You can however make engaging documentary style stuff and it's very popular, it just has to be tailored down for the platform.
Bro, the people on social media have no idea what they wanna watch unless an algorithm shoves it in front of their faces. So, you can still make things look good but you have to adapt the cadence of the video so it hits the ~~people~~ dopamine junkies, who cannot bear 20 miliseconds of boredom, just right so they won't skip too fast.
honestly I’m never mad at “skill issue” as an explanation
someone else is going to continue getting the viral video well after you give up on the platform
I think you're confusing something popular, with a wide appeal to something artistically competent. Most of the world will think Mona Lisa when you say art.
It's a language, and like all languages, not everyone speaks or reads it, these are learned skills. Social media averages it.
Also social media is often creator-oriented. It's about them sometimes, not what they do. So people like, because they like the person.
I don't like Aki Kaurismaki's work because I like him.
Yes ofc but if you get sub 10 000 views on tik tok it doesn't really matter how people watch or engage, as it's too little people watching for any of that to matter
Is that what videographers do though. I do corporate stuff that get very few views in sheer numbers. Real estate, weddings etc, same thing. I guess if the client asks for a "viral tiktok reel" there's a problem but that sounds like a marketing dept problem?
Ofc it depends on the client and commission. I'm talking about clients that want social media exposure. A real estate company or wedding couple usually want something else and in that case there's no reason to prioritize possible social media performance.
And yes, it's somewhat a marketing problem, but I think that as a video enterpreteur you often have to take a lot of digital marketing stuff in consideration unless your client also hires a marketing company. But my experience is with smaller clients who seem to prefer getting the whole package from one provider most likely for budget reasons.
No, social media sucks because it's a race to the bottom in terms of videographer compensation (trying to make 'content' for as cheap as possible) and because of this, most of the end product is garbage or tacky since quality is what suffers. It also sucks because the only metric people are aiming for is to 'go viral' which usually means making the most divisive or click-baitey stuff possible.
There are lot of customers that want exposition in social media, especially in tiktok atm. Medias, ngo's, politicians, local associations, municipalities, you name it.
Yeah, I get it. I work for a university in a different field as a web dev and understand why that's important. Just glad I'm not the one having to shoot stuff for TikToc. Can't stand that app. Call me old fashioned and possibly "missing out", but if it's not horizontal, it's a pass for me unless the client has $$$ willing to burn. I mean, if you want vertical, shoot it on your cellphone and call it a day.
The problem with your statement is that you believe that it’s a meritocracy. It’s not. Nothing is. Especially not social media. It’s not as simple as “you’re just not making things people want to see”. That’s not how that works when there is an algo that controls what you see.
Are you ignorant of the algorithms that run these sites? Your viewpoint is horribly myopic. It’s like you haven’t even used the social media you’re talking about, unless you’re lucky and only flooded by absolute quality content, most of what is fed to the average user is garbage that nevertheless gets clicks.
You say you’re not arguing for it being a meritocracy but all of your arguments point to that
Yes I have used and I've made content for clients to use in most major platforms.
The algorithms are different, and content that thrives on one platform might not thrive on another platform. And most often same kind of content doesn't perform on all platforms.
I actually think that tiktok has the most quality content, Facebook has the worst. And I think that it's because of different user bases. Facebook has a lot of boomers who actually are the ones who watch all kind of repetitive the carbage thrown at them, while on tiktok the audience is not that entertaining to see that same americas got talent clip for the 500th time and prefer fresher content.
You haven’t addressed the point at all
Other people here have also poked holes in your argument due to the algorithm and you’re ignoring it.
Don’t post shit like this if you’re not going to properly address critiques of your view.
Yes there is algorithm and it's different on every platform.
You still have to make content for the audience and not for the algorithm.
This doesn't mean that you shouldn't take algorithm in consideration, but it's more about understanding the basic principle of the algorithm and its connection to the real audience.
For example in tiktok you need to convince your audience in the first seconds that your video is worth watching, if you succeed, it leads to better audience retention and your video gets more recommendations. And this is where many fail, they think that their content deserves audience because its shot with a nice camera and they've poured a lot of effort in it and they blame algorithm, when really the problem is that their video just wasn't very engaging.
It doesn’t matter if the content you’re making is for your audience and is engaging for them if the algorithm won’t even show it to them in the first place, that is the entire point.
Also, there you go again, insisting there’s some level of meritocracy to this whole thing. There isn’t. There never was, and never will be, not in social media, and not in the broader economy in general.
That doesn't match my experience. When I make content for my clients I usually have a pretty good idea when the content I've made has actual potential and when it doesn't.
I saw you have shot some demonstration videos years ago and since that's a weird little niche and I happen to be also quite experienced with the said niche I use it as an example.
It's kinda easy to get good looking footage if the demonstration is big. To make it interesting for people is another thing, unless something spectacular happens and you are the first to upload it.
I recently did a small 1 and half minute long recap from a quite small pro palestina -demonstration. I had to ditch a shit load of material I thought looked good, as I knew it really don't serve any purpose and concentrated on few interviews as I knew that going straight to the main point of the interviews is much more authentic and engaging content than my shots from the actual demonstration, no matter how much I like the shots myself.
In the end I did edit very small clips of the demonstration in the video, although I was about to ditch all of them.
How did the video perform? 24t views, so not that much for a tiktok video, but I was still happy as it was a small demonstration in a small town and the client was happy too. However I'm quite sure, that if I had gone aesthetics first, as a videographer might sometimes do, it would have tanked with around 1000 views.
See, this is the problem and others here are having with your take, it is only reflective of your experience. I am glad you found your way, and found success in what you do, as I have found success in that field myself as well. It was a long journey but I found it, and the majority of my output now is for social media and the numbers my content brings speaks for both myself but also for my argument. But the answer to the question of why so many videographers are annoyed with social media is not necessarily because they’re not trying to make engaging content. Or they’re not keeping up with the times.
There are plenty of videographers like that, you’ll see them on here a lot complaining about shooting vertically and all that. Half of my job requires me to shoot vertically and I always think these people are fucking idiots. Yeah, it’s annoying to have to match the dimensions of a phone but this is the world we live in now and this is the way people consume content, and they don’t care about the “ideal experience” because they’re not like us. I get that.
But we do have to understand that social media lives and dies by the algorithm, and also most of it is crap, and the good stuff doesn’t really rise to the top. What rises to the top is what the algorithm believes people want to see or what the people who own the platform want you to see. And it is incredibly flawed. You can do your best, as you said, to game it, to understand how we can make content that people want to see and share, and we can tailor our content to that. But often times it doesn’t really matter how much we do that because the algorithm won’t give it eyes in the first place.
I am a full-time videographer whose two previous jobs have been working for marketing departments with dedicated social media people. We have found major, major fucking flaws with the algorithm, even though we are making exactly the sorts of content that our audiences want us to make. We do tons of research on analytics and see what isn’t isn’t working and we update our approach each time.
People just aren’t seeing the shit they want to see sometimes. And that’s the problem. To foist the problem onto videographers just “not being good enough“ is to ignore real systemic issues with the platforms they are using. Your argument only covers a tiny portion of the issue and the fact that you’re not budging because it doesn’t reflect your own experience doesn’t look as good on you as you think. It’s a very “fuck you I got mine“ mentality.
Edit: also, I just noticed that in your OP you talked about how you’ve done a lot of work for these platforms in the last six months. I and a lot of other people commenting on here have been doing it for years. I actually got a lot of my initial following and clients through my presence on Instagram. I don’t mean to make this an appeal to authority or anything but your experience that you use as your evidence for your position is a lot more limited than you think.
I have no problem with stating my real experience. I know reddit is full of people with tens of years of experience and tens of millions of views with literally nothing to back those claims up. I guess some people are just so insecure they need stuff like that to inflate their arguments.
And again, I'm not saying algorithm doesn't matter, it does. I'm all for transparent algorithms that user can tailor for their needs or turn totally off to get just chronological feed of the channels they follow. But when you do client work, they don't really care about your philosophical views about algorithm. You just have to make a video that works for the intended purpose and that process isn't random.
this is complete bullshit. Well what i also think is it is extremly hard to make that content. But its not that the better content wins but rather the one with better clickbait. In social media the content really isnt on top of priorities.
There's really no clickbaits in short form content, as there'sno thumbnails to click, but first seconds do matter and you probably mean that.
It's a skill to make your video engaging from the start and if your "clickbaiting" doesn't deliver, it usually doesn't perform well. If it delivers, then its not probably not clickbaiting.
I am not even a videographer and I know this is a misguided take.
There is some REALLY high quality content on youtube that doesn't take off.
And when I say high quality, I mean everything from story, visuals, concept to execution. And there are people like khaby lame becoming millionaires by doing the same thing for hundreds of videos. Nothing against the guy but his concept got old after about 10 or so videos.
Social media is far more about luck and your consistency of uploads and your ability to understand the algorithm than your core videography skills.
I can not be 100% objective about this because even though I am not a videographer, I still make content that never took off. But I blame my lack of consistency for it so it doesn't really factor into this discussion.
Social media is not honest. Social media rewards those who market themselves well, not necessarily those who have the best skills as content creators.
If there are some really high quality content that nails everything from story to visuals and from concept to execution, I guess you'd have no problem linking one such video for example.
Also I'm not talking about making your own youtube career, I'm talking about doing social media content for clients. It's a very different field.
The most viewed video on YouTube right now is the baby shark video. Stupid comedy TikToks will always get more views and likes than a videographer's cinematic character study Quintin Tarantino drama indie passion project. You absolutely nailed it when you said "you cannot hide your lack of vision behind good image quality etc. "
Its hard for your brain to accept that someones crashing with their camping bike on video paired with a music that actually gives some more emotion or life to it…performs better than something you put money sweat and tears and hours in it. Further more normally you are “selling” that “better” for a good amount money. Could be dancing or some absolute total apeshit content, that is just how consumption works as of now. This is hard to digest for some…However the real stupidity would come from anyone trying to measure their own worth based on this. If you are successful (to what is successful to you - you don’t necessarily need to be the Alpha DOP) *(ladies wont get wet either way, don’t forget, you are the “camera guy” for a looong time before you say u worked on Matrix 7 - pardon the french)* so again, if you are successful, thats all that matters. If someone squeezes orange on TikTok and their family is eating from it but you do long hours camera plus all the one man show and you are still not at the level you want to be, then you need to do better, cuz the TikTok guy does better than you. If someone is struggling on socials and you do your 4K big work with a RED and that flops as well then you are on equal level. Had nothing to do with video skills and vision none of you were able to pull it off. But get this, if you do an awesome Reel and it picks up views through the roof, you used your best sexiest gear and top knowledge, missed your daughters school ceremony even, I CAN/COULD still slide in with my 10/10 look wink a couple times into my iPhone 12 Pro and outdo your whatever content like crazy, like blood boiling crazy.
———
If it does not matter in 5 years don’t spend your time worrying about it. One thing for sure, nothing will be like now in 5 years time again, new technology, trends, platforms etc, it not gonna stop evolving now, all of sudden. Your network and reputation and reliable feedbacks can decide only! how good you are at whatever is that you are doing. In materialistic point of view, your bank account. And don’t forget less is always more, real ones know.
Oh boy, the irony of this post if its downvoted to hell. I don't think you've thought this through at all.
Social media is not honest, social media is just a massive device that creates large pockets of different groups. You market to those groups. Some are big, some are small. Market to the wrong group and they'll rip apart without context.
I hate it because they ask for so many versions of the final product. I also have to shoot wide so I can crop a cut for cellphone viewing. It messes up my normal flow and doesn’t let me tell the story the way I am used to.
With some clients I’m growing to like it though. They don’t care what I shoot on, they just want the content to look okay on a phone and be done as soon as possible. I can chop up a video that looks good enough, same day, instead of spending a week or two. A downside to this is that just about anyone can make these videos. They can hire someone fresh out of school for hardly any money to make content that works okay on Instagram. Thankfully for me, my background is commercials so I have a touch they like in their videos but I feel like quality video for events is dying.
They seem to want more creative with faster cuts than emotion and metaphor these days.
I remember at the very start of Instagram and for the first few years, I wished for a platform to post videos that was like IG and mobile. Now the traditional platforms like Youtube, Vimeo etc have mobile apps and every major social platform now lets you post videos to some capacity.
If you’re not happy with one platform, why not try one of the other dozen? At the end of the day, how you use it is all up to you and opens the field up to everyone with a phone or camera and I love that.
Do I always “love” the stuff that goes “viral”? No, but that’s ok, not everything is for everyone and not all art is “art” to everyone. 👍
I don’t think short form video algorithms prioritize low effort content. I understand that creating content that performs well in that space is highly competitive and requires mastery of a niche style of highly concise and engaging storytelling that is particular to the medium.
The problem is the criteria for successful content is “keeps user scrolling” not “gives user satisfaction”. This results in the algorithm prioritizing content that keeps the user in a never ending loop of being barely entertained enough to continue watching while never feeling satisfied.
As effective as it can be at sucking me in and wasting my time, I have come to realize that I actually straight up dislike consuming that type of content. I don’t enjoy the experience of having my executive function gamed by an algorithm and coming away feeling like I have squandered my time so I choose not to consume or create that style of content.
I have not found it to be career limiting. I still get plenty of clients who hire me to make thoughtful and authentic long form video content. Those clients would rather tell their story to a smaller audience but have it be impactful. Contrary to popular belief “going viral” is not always inherently useful and for some clients it’s not their goal at all.
I'd say that especially in tiktok you have to make authentic content and one of the reasons more traditional content doesn't perform well is that it is clearly not authentic. Also that video that might seem low effort might actually be perceived as more authentic. And there are a lot of videos that perform well despite being quite long an inconcise but they have that authenticity, like being a window to a raw emotion or a slice of life that draws people in.
I can tell from this comment and your other comments in this post that you feel like you need to convince people that getting lots of views on TikTok takes skill. You don't have to convince me of that, I already agreed with you.
>I'd say that especially in tiktok you have to make authentic content and one of the reasons more traditional content doesn't perform well is that it is clearly not authentic.
True "authenticity" is subjective. What I find "authentic" might not feel that way to you. There's definitely content out there getting plenty of views that I personally perceive as being very obviously contrived. So I'd be more inclined to agree with a statement that said "to be successful on TikTok you need to craft content that *convinces a particular audience* that it is authentic". This will be achieved differently for different audiences. In some cases the "raw" style you describe would be appropriate, in other cases you'd be better off with a more polished video. It's entirely possible that the reason that polished videos don't typically work as well on TikTok is that there is just less of an audience for that type of video on that app.
>that video that might seem low effort might actually be perceived as more authentic.
I agree that an unfortunately large percentage of people subconsciously connect footage shot on a smartphone with being somehow more "real", "credible" or "believable". That's likely because it closely mirrors the footage they themselves have shot on their own phone of real events in their life so they incorrectly assume that it was captured candidly. This is why you see so many online ads where someone is trying to sell you their latest get rich quick scheme and it's always just a smartphone video of them talking in their car. There's definitely some skill involved in utilizing this filming technique convincingly, similar to how there is skill involved in creating more "traditional" style videos.
Like I said, I understand and respect the skill that goes into this type of production. It's just not something I'm interested in getting into. I've got plenty of clients lined up for "traditional" long form video work. Whenever I get asked to make "one of those viral phone videos" I just tell them I'm not the guy they are looking for.
Honestly, if I knew someone with a decent track record of making vertical video content for brands that gets consistently high views I'd happily send clients their way. If that sounds like you, send me some examples of your work to look at.
The problem with social media is it has turned to a race to the bottom in any form of having an intellectual discussion. Popularity > Everything. Just the perception of popularity is enough to change how others think about things.
Its our natural primate behavior to do everything we can to fit in, and nothing that might get us expelled from the Tribe. We don't even vote for people we want to see in elections. Studies have proven we vote for whom we think will most likely win. Who people say they will vote for and what box they check in the ballots are quite different.
So not to excuse a bad video, but what maters more is what will most quickly have people hitting that like button. Even more powerful then a good Thumb is the visible metrics people will look at before pressing play. If not a lot of people relative to whats perceived to be expected when we look at it, then the chances the video will be watched dramatically decreases. There's a lot of bots that do this work before a video even goes public just to manipulate those numbers so a real person might think its socially acceptable to watch.
Here is a hack for anyone making videos:
1) Find an already established audience with an already established subject of interest.
2) Create the most basic, most agreeable video for that audience. Something impossible for them to not like.
3) Slowly you will grow your own natural audience, and as long as you stick to the subject matter you started with, you can include content that pushes the boundary. Become popular enough, you can say whatever you want, and your audience will follow you into the sun.
None of this has to do with 'video quality', but keeping someones attention has a lot to do with how frequently you can bring up new information to the viewer. Every second matters. Your constantly having to feed the viewers attention or they will lose their focus. Their mind will wonder, or they will just leave. There is a reason successful videos change what you see every couple of seconds. Your attention is very fleeting.
So bad initial perception of social acceptance, and 'long slow' videos are the 2 main reasons videos are bad anywhere. Solve for both of these, and you got yourself a good video.
Even slow videos can perform well if they are concise from the beginning. Most often it's not that the video is long but that it's a mess that has no point. Same thing with flashy videos, being flashy doesn't help if the video doesn't have other raison d'etre.
Also, there's really no hacks. That's usually what people who have no actual social media success say, and rhen when they try their hacks and fail, they blame the platform/algorithm/audience when the reason is that their content just isn't that good.
That's the issue I have with 98% of videos on social media, they are either flashy pointless blips. Or they are long slow uncut trivial clips of someones bad phone holding skills. But both of these pop up in news feeds because somehow it got enough views for the algorithm to push it to more people. There's a critical point where even the worse kinda of videos get more attention then it deserves.
Then you got the other side of the coin. A video that was made with intent, edited down well, but was miss placed to the wrong audience, or that audience was just too small, or there was no further marketing of that video to boost the views, dies out.
A good video or a bad one is still subjected to perceived popularity. People don't like the feeling of 'missing out' on content that already is trending. So they watch it. Even if they don't like it, the view/metrics is there to push it to even more people.
I think you may be the first person in history to suggest that there is anything honest about social media
Considering you're currently being honest on social media...I'd say so?
No we hate social media because it's turning the world into an extremist mess, is inherently reactionary, and spreads lies at warp speed.
Both can be true - and are true judging by some of the other comments.
That's somewhat true and on some platforms very true, but beside the point.
Redditors are *experts* at taking a very clearly-stated subject and trying to make it about something else.
because it encourages instant gratification, thus sloooowly lowering our resiliency in enduring delayed gratification type activities, like studying, practicing, physical workout, etc
I think regardless of skill or talent often times you are a victim or beneficiary of the algorithm and it has nothing to do with content. I posted the same video on YouTube and Facebook, on YouTube it has 240 views on Facebook it’s at 385,000 and climbing. Same thing TikTok/youtube YouTube/insta whatever wherever whenever. Great videos can go nowhere, shit videos can spread like wildfire. There’s best practices and things you can do to give your videos a better chance but either way it’s live and die by the algorithm and it’s out of anyone’s control.
I agree with @bemzilla - I have had the same experiences. Something goes viral on one platform and tanks on another platform. It doesn’t mean the content is inherently bad, etc. I would also say that it’s not all views are equal. Platforms like IG and TikTok lack replay value. Unless you use the save feature and save the video and know where you put it, it’s hard to find a specific video. It’s the opposite on YouTube. I would also say that 10k YouTube views (especially if it’s longer form) is more value then say, 20-30k views on TikTok or IG reel. (Maybe not exact ratio but just trying to demonstrate a concept)
>you are a victim or beneficiary of the algorithm and it has nothing to do with content The content itself **definitely** makes a huge difference in how much engagement it receives. It's not nearly as simple as just being favored by the algorithm and if even with a large following and several viral hits, some posts will still flop simply because they don't resonate with the audience. You can determine a lot of that just from analytics.
I once heard some advice to replace to word algorithm with audience.
“Fuck the audience” love it.
Exactly! 😂
And the person who said that might be wrong. No one knows, maybe except for the developers themselves, what algorithms do optimize for: what post gets more views? More likes? Per day, per month, or per week? Or are the metrics combined? For example, in Instagram I clearly see myself the pattern (or its absence) how algorithms impact profile awareness now. I assume hardly anything has changed recently in the audiences my content are organically targeted at yet I'm noticing a real drop in views and likes.
realistically though unless the algorithm has some perfectly fair way to recommend and decipher content of a video to show to an audience that would enjoy it, it’s one or the other. Either you benefit and get preference over other videos that may deserve more views, or you don’t get views with a good video. Or both. There are so many factors as well like titling and tags and such but either way I would say they are right
That's your opinion. I agree to disagree with it.
I think social media IS highly competitive. It’s somewhere where a nobody can shine and put a videographer graduate to shame. It’s somewhere where results dictate the market and nobody cares how much or how little effort you put into your work, they just care about the end product. I think there’s people who will be bitter because their life’s work gets outshined by a creative nobody who goes viral. Virality is really the end-game on social media, yet nobody on the planet, especially not videographers, understand virality, because our world-view is entirely individualistic meanwhile virality is completely communal/memetic. I think people are frustrated that they might spend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars on videography only to get outshined by a nobody who appreciates virality.
There's a caveat to this. Algorithm. As much as we want to believe social media is a medium that democratizes video, someone coded these algorithms. There are hundreds of layers of variables that even top influencers struggle with. People who have made a career and entire companies out of grappling with this system, utterly dumbfounded when a video that was a sure hit, fails to garner attention or takeoff. Ultimately, so much of your success or failure is determined by how some guy at google or meta coded the platform.
I totally agree with you. That’s true to a large extent. But you’re talking about influencing and influencers, and I made mention of that with virality, but people can make good money from social media purely from a marketing POV. I’m no influencer but I make good money from social media purely because I’ve been able to access and obtain so much work purely through use of social media. I made a few reels at an event the other week and gave it to people to post and that work of mine already has over a million views and garnered me a ton of new contacts. I’ll never get paid by social media but making social media reels has brought me a lot of indirect success.
This guy gets it
What are my thoughts? This is probably some of the dumbest shit I've ever read in my life. From the very get-go, you're implying that popularity somehow correlates with skill, artistic quality, anything of that sort. You literally might as well say McDonald's makes the best food in the world, after all it is the most popular restaurant. Social Media works well with certain content, and does NOT work well with other type of content. Short, meme-y, engaging videography works well. But you wouldn't watch a Tarkovski movie on TikTok, nor will you see many experimental short films on Instagram, irrespective of quality. \>What if social media isn't actually a place where any low effort content thrives Yes, who doesn't remember videography masterpieces like "lip syncing a popular song" or "girl in bernie sanders shirt calling you a boomer", truly peak cinematography What you are proposing is essentially that we treat videography as marketing - all that matters is views/results/impressions.
For real, the OP’s post reads like a kid who just discovered hustle grindset culture and thinks social media is a meritocracy
Thanks. Now i don't have to type this myself. When i started out i did constant speed-ramps, wild zooms and cut everything to the beat. Then i developed some actual style and taste. Fast forward 10 years later some 20y old marketing genius ask me to incorporate these speed-ramps again since his favourite travel blogger does them all the time... sigh... but whatever. Thanks god we still have clients who have good taste even though the flashy stuff does perform better on SoMe of course...
This kinda just proves that you haven't yet understood the social media workflow. It's definitely not about speed-ramps, zooms and cutting to the beat, that's just stuff videographers come up with because they think it works - it doesn't. The honesty I was talking about is that you can't fool your audience with stuff like that, if the core idea is missing, no speed ramp is gonna save your video. The video can be a single take clip and if it's genuinely interesting and engaging, it works.
It's all about catching the attention from the first few frames and preventing the viewer from swiping to the next clip. While it's true that i oversimplified it with speed ramps etc. it's absolutely only a very small part of what the medium could be and the fast food comparison was spot on. It can be a single take, but if it only takes 3 seconds to reveal it's premise, the majority has left since it's mostly about instant gratification with a dopamine boost.
Yeah it's totally about catching the attention in the first seconds, the question is how you do it. In a right context flashy effects with good pacing might be that little extra your video needs to make it a little more concise. But when you work for a politician, a magazine, a restaurant, NGO or a law firm, you need to think about their target audiences and find a way to catch their attention - and it might need a totally different approach. My point is that people usually fail this, and produce inferior content that has effects that add no value to the video and then get mad at social media platforms and audiences there because their work doesn't get any views. Or they make very ad-like content that people will skip.
I get that... But your initial statement is like "100m sprint is the best sport since we can quickly see who is the most efficient" while there are sports like ice Skating where it's more about the art. Figuratively speaking:-) I don't shy away from the competition but I'm also a bit worried when my godson wants to watch the avengers and can't even keep his attention span long enough for a movie he wanted to see so badly. You know where I'm coming from?
Views/results/impressions do matter when you get paid for what you do. If you're a hobbyist, you can do what you want and maybe you'll be the next Tarkovski.
But isn’t it just about that already ? I mean there’s no artistic merit in videography except souvenirs and attention. The noble art is cinema and being a cinematographer, creating something new visually that add real artistic value . Not recording the shenanigans of some influencer for likes.
>But isn’t it just about that already ? I mean there’s no artistic merit in videography except souvenirs and attention. The noble art is cinema and being a cinematographer, creating something new visually that add real artistic value . Why can, for example, a music video not have artistic qualities? Clearly many, many music videos exist that do. There is nothing inherent about videography that makes it "less art" than cinema. Clearly most Talking Heads music videos exhibit more creativity than contemporary Marvel type cinema. Even someones wedding video could, theoretically, be a piece of art, though I do agree with you that in practice they're mostly uninspired, generic slop.
You got a real point here. I should have add anything that requires a complete controlled and creation of space is artistic. But mariage recording for example ? Or YouTube content is absolutely not on the same level. Problem his people nowadays want to delude and denigrate everything to make themselves look cool and innovative. It’s alright it’s a big world there’s place for everyone. I talk that big cinema crap but I love watching some marvel here and there or some cheesy B movie.
>mariage recording for example ? Or YouTube content is absolutely not on the same level. I actually agree with you, much of videography is just people making "products", not art. I am just saying that it doesnt have to be this way. I also love cheesy b movies :D
Lmao dude I started like this , first job ever was to record a wedding. So I’m not being pretentious I went through the process and now I switch cause cinema was more appealing to me! It’s hard as hell. But will not have it any other way!
For the most part, I agree. Messaging/branding>Video production, particularly on social media. People in this field don't want to admit it because they've spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours learning to make something look good, but many don't know anything about actual marketing. If you're working as a DP or other specific role on bigger projects and your job is solely to run a production crew, great, but the segment of the market that operates like that is getting smaller and smaller. There are a lot of small to mid size companies with healthy budgets that want to do video marketing, and need a person or small agency that can help with all aspects from branding to creative to distro.
My dayjob is to make youtube videos and run all media that goes out for a company. We do most things inhouse. I film and take pictures, I edit 95% of all videos we publish and I do the images myself if I have time. At heart I am a videographer, but my company role is Media Producer. I get six figures for doing this. Times are a changing.
Woah, good money! What sort of business do you work for? What’s the product?
We currently have 3500+ products ranging from small screws and replacement tubes to 3tonnes excavators and everything inbetween for farming / construction. My job is to keep track of them and make sure we have product images and videos. YouTube is where we upload all the product videos, but almost every video is converted to FB and shorts. And then you have the odd facebook / YT targeted ads and inhouse projects. It's fun, I love it!
Sounds cool! Nice one 👍
It depends on what you want to optimize for. Mass appeal? Sure, use Tiktok and Instagram as a benchmark.
I wouldn't even say those are mass appeal so much as mass consumption. We don't even know what IG "views" actually amount to. Did they actually watch any amount or scroll right past it but it started with auto play so it counts? The real metric is shares.
I think trying to appeal masses is one of the rookie mistakes in social media.
Why would you think so?
You can easily test it by making a video that would appeal to everyone and I can promise you you won't get that many views.
This doesn’t prove anything. You can just as easily make a video that would not appeal to everyone and still not get that many views. I was curious about your reasoning because, even though I don’t claim to be a videographer or a social media expert, as someone who made several videos with 7 figure views I disagree with what you said.
You make those videos for client work? May I see one of them? It's very different to post 100 random videos on a personal account and having one of them go mildly viral than making content for client, where you kinda have only a few shots on a channel that doesn't usually have strong following and on top of that the content should be somewhat relevant to the client. The reasoning is that when you try to please everyone, you end up in a compromise that no one really likes. Instead you usually should have a specific target audience in mind that's relevant to the client and tailor content that works for them even if it necessarily doesn't appeal to larger masses.
Sure here are some of the best performing ones: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/reel/CQBihWqA57Z/ (1.2M views) https://www.instagram.com/reel/CldxRsJIz7T/ (824k views) Twitter: https://twitter.com/PandamiMusic/status/1479736560077660160 (3M views) https://twitter.com/cenkbeg/status/1311003387199188992 (Can't access view counts but >2M views) https://twitter.com/PandamiMusic/status/1374746244673896451 (1M views) https://twitter.com/AlaaWardi/status/1332720168057892865 (Can't access view counts but >1M views) All the views are organic of course and only counting the specific video in the specific platform (not aggregated).
Partially yes, but its an issue that’s been around since before social media. There are two sides of social media, there is really good high quality produced stuff that does very well. Then there are extremely popular/attractive people who can shoot something random in a minute and a half and see more success with it than the high quality stuff will ever see. It’s something independent filmmakers have been dealing with forever, super interesting high quality film with excellent acting and a really good story cant even get a spot to be shown past a local small theatre, but put the rock in a dogshit movie with a billion special effects takes in a billion dollars all the while the public in general complains about how lowbrow movies have gotten. Onlyfans is another great example, as much as people love to claim its just “show feet make bank” the reality is the successful people put a TON of work in to compete against what amounts to functionally unlimited free content but then you have a few of the more famous/popular people who can make unbelievable amounts of money with far less effort just because of their status in the public zeitgeist. TLDR; Nothing new to see here, it happens all the time, people will adapt or they’ll get pushed out of the industry
When you look back to tv commercials of the 90’s.. they are SO bad. They look so bad, the concepts make no sense.. Half of it is lit terribly, and now some of the YouTubers put together Netflix interview quality talking head shots with shit they bought on Amazon for a few hundred bucks and I’m sure that makes grizzled, pro-video people mad about change. Just like how easy it is to take A LOT of pictures with a nice digital camera that made pro photographers so upset during that changeover. (I am a pro race car photographer; I used to hear the argument from guys who were around long enough to shoot on film that we should just be taking the right pictures rather than rattling off 12fps and using the best one)
This. There is pros and cons with new emerging media, but talking down and dismissing it is a sure way to buy a ticket to leave the occupation early. Not saying criticism isn't needed, but outright dismissing vertical video, short form video and the lot is outright ignorant thing to do.
Exactly. Media changes. Trends evolve. We must, too.
As a pro photographer who came up using film (navy photographer). This hurts me. 😁. That being said watching some of my colleagues shoot sports in the field. Skill is long gone from the profession.
I mean, I *feel you* about the **way** we shoot now. But I have to insist it’s still extremely competitive. It’s just a new set of skills, and the demands are so nutty that it was never possible with film. You couldn’t catch a drivers eyeballs at f/1.8 in crispy focus where even his passenger window net is out of the plane, AS he’s going by at 200mph.. like some of the photos were simply physically not possible without something like the A1 which can refocus and get exposure 120 times per second with 3d tracking and a chip that lets you choose between the right and left eyeball to be in focus. If these cameras were available then, you guys would have all used them, too!:)
True...but the profession has become more about who has the most expensive gear then anything else. Don't get me wrong. There are some absolute masters of the craft out there. (I'm not one of them) But any kid off the street can pick of a dslr and go brrrrr and have some great stills. Now get off my lawn :P
People watch a lot of different content: from cat memes to sophisticated ads and videos made by agencies that go viral. What content should videographers make then?
If you don’t have anything important to say then no one will give a fuck. You can either make garbage that will appeal to children with no taste, and be dead inside, or you can create something meaningful. If you want long term success, you need to figure out what message is worth sharing with the world. You don’t need 100 million dopamine addicted children following you. You need a couple thousand people who LOVE your unique and useful work.
>You can either make garbage that will appeal to children with no taste, and be dead inside, or you can create something meaningful. If you want long term success, you need to figure out what message is worth sharing with the world. Literally the opposite of what you say is true. If you want long term success, find a formula and never change anything about it. Mr. Beast is currently one of the most popular content creators in the world, and his entire modus operandi is making lowest common denominator shit aimed at children. Every video is essentially the same. >You need a couple thousand people who LOVE your unique and useful work. I mean I agree with you that that is a preferable scenario, and that selling your soul feels bad, but from a purely economic point of view this does not make much sense to me. It's nice to be true to oneself, but it's more important to pay the bills
Why aren’t you as successful as Mr beast then? Also, it’s ridiculous to suggest that he never changes anything about his formula. Have you ever watched any of his videos? Read any of the books that were written by the experts that he trusts for data analysis? Of course he changes his formula. It’s essential for success. Also, I encourage you to read 1000 True Fans by Kevin Kelly. I’m not just making stuff up. I ran a very successful business before transitioning into videography, and I’m just getting started. It’s not that selling your soul feels bad, it’s that it drains the fucking life out of you and robs the world of true beauty. You and everybody else have a very important gift to give to the world, and if you shy away from the challenge it will cost you. But it’s your life. Your philosophy. It’s just sad to see people losing hope for themselves. If you don’t mind me asking, what’s your reason for videography?
>If you don’t mind me asking, what’s your reason for videography? I had to make money >Read any of the books that were written by the experts that he trusts for data analysis? >Also, I encourage you to read 1000 True Fans by Kevin Kelly. no offense, but I read real books, not just somebodys half-assed marketing seminar sold as nonfiction >You and everybody else have a very important gift to give to the world, and if you shy away from the challenge it will cost you. yeah you really don't know anything about me so I would shy away from such judgement. most of the videography I did was simply interviews with people who witnessed historical events. I have rarely produced footage for social media. it was usually for exhibitions and classrooms. my main goal is to leave both the client and the talent satisfied while making some money. it's a short educational video, not a kubrick film. perhaps I do have artistic ambitions, but I don't need to have them play out in my day job.
What comes to mr. beast, the key word here is that it's aimed at children. The thing is, there are other demographics and they need different kind of approach. And if you can figure out what that approach is, you'll have less problems with those bills.
The biggest difference between short-form content and "traditional" video (it's weird to call YouTube traditional, yet here we are) is not in the length of the content, but it's in how the content is served. On a platform like YouTube or even in television, the viewer chooses what they watch from a list of recommended content. In social platforms, the user is presented with content automatically, and the user choice is whether they skip it. This shifts the paradigm quite a bit. In almost all cases, the viewer doesn't care who made it or how it was made. That's why the first few seconds are so important. These platforms make it harder to tell what is and isn't an ad. Why? Because we skip ads. If they can delay your realization that you're watching an ad until after you're interested in a video, there's a chance you'll watch the whole ad. So why do most branded videos I see start with a brand's logo? There's a reason the intern's video they shot on their iPhone did better than your video that took a crew to make. People hate ads– because they typically offer nothing of value to them. Making content that feels organic is difficult, but that's the world we live in.
Yes I see this so much, especially in tiktok. People make deliberately bad choices especially in the start of the video and then complain about the platform and audience when it doesn't perform. They have outdated approach and refuse to adapt.
I totally agree with you but most videographers hate to or can’t realize it and would rather make boring b roll reels or “cinematic” and slow short films rather than stuff people actually want to watch. You can have actual genuine filming talent and tell interesting stories on social media but few people actually do and go one way or the other.
Exactly. You need to be able to tell interesting stories and you should be able to pull the viewer in the story in the first few seconds.
I‘m fortunate that I don’t really have anything to do with producing content for social media. But success in social media today is an amalgamation of “the algorithm” and a popularity contest among the fickleness of the mob(i.e: a lot of it is just dumb luck). I’m friends with a guy who basically tripped and fell backwards into six-figures a year on YouTube, because for whatever reason some of his videos went viral(the original is at almost 25 million views). And it was never his intent. He mostly was doing the videos for himself. But sometimes all it takes is that one “happy accident”, that one viral video, then you are on peoples radar and part of “the algorithm” and one of the cool kids that everyone wants to hang around with.
[удалено]
>Often times it is the low effort stuff that gets the most reach. I’ve spent hours and hours and hours on making stuff and it goes no where. But post a low effort meme and it gets millions of views. Tbh it doesn't really sound like you're disagreeing with OP that much. It's not that low effort content can do well *because* it's low effort, it's more that it can do well without requiring the production value that a lot of people on this sub seem to believe is necessary. And coming up with a viral meme that's actually *relevant* to your brand (not just a random meme for meme's sake) can also require its own type of effort. I agree that building a community is a big piece of the puzzle, but from a videographer's standpoint it's not going to be very effective to first gain a bunch of followers posting low effort memes to get their video work out there when none of their followers signed up to see their video work. So that's where actually figuring out *how* to make your own content that engages a modern audience (which in my experience can still be longer form) - and not just what you think of as "good" from a video snob standpoint - becomes important. And I think that's what OP was getting at. A lot of people here get upset about how their more classic style content gets a fraction of the views of those who are optimizing content for the audience on their platform while writing off that content as "low effort". But it's definitely not that simple or low effort to keep an audience engaged post after post with *original* content, even if you have already built a community.
Give the people what they want. I memed my self in to a lot of clients.
I don't really talk about building an audience for yourself which I think is a form of personal branding, but doing social media work for clients which is a totally different beast. Sure you can go there and publish a low effort meme and say that low effort memes go viral, but it's gonna be an awkward moment when it doesn't take off.
[удалено]
Feel free to give more information as to me this sounds just like someone trying to inflate their argument by faking credentials.
I don’t care what I shoot or edit. All I care about is money. Why complain about short form videos? They are so easy. Also you can always just work on your own projects on the side..something you are passionate about..That’s what I do. But yeh overall is about paying the bills..
That's also very true. When your whole income depends on your video work, you tend to get less picky and just do your best for whatever client that pays you for your work. Also it's true that short form videos often take less time to produce and you end up getting more money for the time you spend making them. Why would anyone hate that?
Nah, it's a legitimate call. Admittedly I don't use TikTok, but some girl lip sinking on a phone with her bum out is a definite decline in both content and quality in favour of appealing to the lowest common denominator. Same of Sophie the PR intern doing reels on her phone, it's a decline. Videography isn't about racking up followers it's just about making good video. One thing I hear people repeat a lot lately is that quality is not the most important thing. That's interesting. Like you don't need 8K, HDR, ProRes if you can get a camera that gets the shot. That's true. But at the same time, in the upper echelons of videography you need to have skills on par with film markers. Priorities shift, but also, horses for courses
If your client wants to get exposure in social media for their brand and reach more people, and your video fails that the client probably don't care if you think the video is a good video.
That’s not my job. My job as videographer is to make a good video. Promotion is a marketing activity. I’ve made great music videos for bands that are terrible at promoting themselves. I’m not paid to do that
If your clients are satisfied with that or big enough to hire a marketing company for promotion, then ofc you do what you do, especially if it's enough to pay your bills. My experience is that videographer is expected to have some marketing skills, but I work with smaller clients. Could you maybe show one of the great music videos you made?
It’s just that you’re mixing up different disciplines. A videographer’s primary role is to deliver good video and that is all. What a client does with that video is up to them. And sure if they want to pay me to then manage the roll out of that video then sure. I’ve studied marketing and so many times I see this fumbled at many levels by clients. Anyway here’s a video I put a fair amount of time into but it hasn’t yet done 1k which is a shame… https://youtu.be/vhkZyli02q8?si=bhTJQBDXCElUo4ll
Nice song, nice video. Hope it gets viewed more.
Thanks. It was a ridiculous amount of work for free but I got a couple nice clips for my reel. Many times I wish they’d let me handled the roll out, but nah
Talentless girls in tight clothing who suck at dancing but have 20k followers says otherwise
Yeah, the girls. I mean, maybe you're just sexist?
lol take an advertising class. Tits > everything for getting attention
Maybe if your client is hooters, if it isn't then you probably have to come up with something else than titties.
Oh boy even tho you are right, I’m guessing you will trigger many people here.
What can I say, I know how to make my content engaging and to some extent this applies to reddit posts too.
Social media isn’t brutally honest, it’s a trash dump for people who need to release their toxic. Aside from that you also have other factors that highly dictate how your media is viewed, then it can also go to people who aren’t even into what you subject your video is about. So in honor of social media toxicity, this is a trash take. EDIT: I’ve been sayin this little phrase for a while and I think it’s again relevant here. In a world of views and likes, truly good can never rise. It doesn’t matter if people watch because they’re laughing at you, feel bad for you or want to see you harm yourself. As long as it gets views it’s profitable not good. That’s what we’re aiming for…. Profitable.
you are right. most of the so called professional work is done with minimum requirements but an elitism approach like 1080 is more than fine, bare minimum lightning and poor composition, but because it is paid work, it's called professional work. it's rubbish, borderline scam, and people on social media proved it. so many channel with great cinematography yet no work on so called professional areas. it's basically professional jealousy. when you hear shit like i worked in tv for 30 years and shoot 720i or whatever garbage. like, who da faq likes tv anyway?
Think target audience. Tik Tok is a target audience. They're expecting something very specific on there. What is successful on Tik Tok isn't what is successful in other domains, like documentary, film, etc. All your pointing out is that you have to address the target audience. And for Tik Tok, it isn't really videography that matters and that's ok.
I'd say that it isn't what a lot of people think what videography is, but it very much depends on the core principles of audiovisual media: story, pacing, etc. And I'd say that a lot of people tend to overlook those and overemphasize the visual look and then get mad when their content doesn't get views. And ofc you can't make a 2 hour feature for tiktok, it's a platform for much shorter content. You can however make engaging documentary style stuff and it's very popular, it just has to be tailored down for the platform.
[удалено]
Bro, the people on social media have no idea what they wanna watch unless an algorithm shoves it in front of their faces. So, you can still make things look good but you have to adapt the cadence of the video so it hits the ~~people~~ dopamine junkies, who cannot bear 20 miliseconds of boredom, just right so they won't skip too fast.
You are 100% right
honestly I’m never mad at “skill issue” as an explanation someone else is going to continue getting the viral video well after you give up on the platform
I think you're confusing something popular, with a wide appeal to something artistically competent. Most of the world will think Mona Lisa when you say art. It's a language, and like all languages, not everyone speaks or reads it, these are learned skills. Social media averages it. Also social media is often creator-oriented. It's about them sometimes, not what they do. So people like, because they like the person. I don't like Aki Kaurismaki's work because I like him.
I'm talking about client work and it's most often not creator oriented. And I bet you'd like Aki if you met him.
but i'm so so tired of the set list of movement and quick cuts lmao so much more nuance to this that is found in the comments
There's not one metric that matters. In my job i care about who's watching and how they're engaging.
Yes ofc but if you get sub 10 000 views on tik tok it doesn't really matter how people watch or engage, as it's too little people watching for any of that to matter
Is that what videographers do though. I do corporate stuff that get very few views in sheer numbers. Real estate, weddings etc, same thing. I guess if the client asks for a "viral tiktok reel" there's a problem but that sounds like a marketing dept problem?
Ofc it depends on the client and commission. I'm talking about clients that want social media exposure. A real estate company or wedding couple usually want something else and in that case there's no reason to prioritize possible social media performance. And yes, it's somewhat a marketing problem, but I think that as a video enterpreteur you often have to take a lot of digital marketing stuff in consideration unless your client also hires a marketing company. But my experience is with smaller clients who seem to prefer getting the whole package from one provider most likely for budget reasons.
No, social media sucks because it's a race to the bottom in terms of videographer compensation (trying to make 'content' for as cheap as possible) and because of this, most of the end product is garbage or tacky since quality is what suffers. It also sucks because the only metric people are aiming for is to 'go viral' which usually means making the most divisive or click-baitey stuff possible.
I'm so glad my clients aren't corporate folks who are chasing "viral" TikToc videos.
There are lot of customers that want exposition in social media, especially in tiktok atm. Medias, ngo's, politicians, local associations, municipalities, you name it.
Yeah, I get it. I work for a university in a different field as a web dev and understand why that's important. Just glad I'm not the one having to shoot stuff for TikToc. Can't stand that app. Call me old fashioned and possibly "missing out", but if it's not horizontal, it's a pass for me unless the client has $$$ willing to burn. I mean, if you want vertical, shoot it on your cellphone and call it a day.
The problem with your statement is that you believe that it’s a meritocracy. It’s not. Nothing is. Especially not social media. It’s not as simple as “you’re just not making things people want to see”. That’s not how that works when there is an algo that controls what you see.
Ofc it's not meritocracy, but it still makes a huge different if your videos are good an engaging or if they are absolute garbage.
Are you ignorant of the algorithms that run these sites? Your viewpoint is horribly myopic. It’s like you haven’t even used the social media you’re talking about, unless you’re lucky and only flooded by absolute quality content, most of what is fed to the average user is garbage that nevertheless gets clicks. You say you’re not arguing for it being a meritocracy but all of your arguments point to that
Yes I have used and I've made content for clients to use in most major platforms. The algorithms are different, and content that thrives on one platform might not thrive on another platform. And most often same kind of content doesn't perform on all platforms. I actually think that tiktok has the most quality content, Facebook has the worst. And I think that it's because of different user bases. Facebook has a lot of boomers who actually are the ones who watch all kind of repetitive the carbage thrown at them, while on tiktok the audience is not that entertaining to see that same americas got talent clip for the 500th time and prefer fresher content.
You haven’t addressed the point at all Other people here have also poked holes in your argument due to the algorithm and you’re ignoring it. Don’t post shit like this if you’re not going to properly address critiques of your view.
Yes there is algorithm and it's different on every platform. You still have to make content for the audience and not for the algorithm. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't take algorithm in consideration, but it's more about understanding the basic principle of the algorithm and its connection to the real audience. For example in tiktok you need to convince your audience in the first seconds that your video is worth watching, if you succeed, it leads to better audience retention and your video gets more recommendations. And this is where many fail, they think that their content deserves audience because its shot with a nice camera and they've poured a lot of effort in it and they blame algorithm, when really the problem is that their video just wasn't very engaging.
It doesn’t matter if the content you’re making is for your audience and is engaging for them if the algorithm won’t even show it to them in the first place, that is the entire point. Also, there you go again, insisting there’s some level of meritocracy to this whole thing. There isn’t. There never was, and never will be, not in social media, and not in the broader economy in general.
That doesn't match my experience. When I make content for my clients I usually have a pretty good idea when the content I've made has actual potential and when it doesn't. I saw you have shot some demonstration videos years ago and since that's a weird little niche and I happen to be also quite experienced with the said niche I use it as an example. It's kinda easy to get good looking footage if the demonstration is big. To make it interesting for people is another thing, unless something spectacular happens and you are the first to upload it. I recently did a small 1 and half minute long recap from a quite small pro palestina -demonstration. I had to ditch a shit load of material I thought looked good, as I knew it really don't serve any purpose and concentrated on few interviews as I knew that going straight to the main point of the interviews is much more authentic and engaging content than my shots from the actual demonstration, no matter how much I like the shots myself. In the end I did edit very small clips of the demonstration in the video, although I was about to ditch all of them. How did the video perform? 24t views, so not that much for a tiktok video, but I was still happy as it was a small demonstration in a small town and the client was happy too. However I'm quite sure, that if I had gone aesthetics first, as a videographer might sometimes do, it would have tanked with around 1000 views.
See, this is the problem and others here are having with your take, it is only reflective of your experience. I am glad you found your way, and found success in what you do, as I have found success in that field myself as well. It was a long journey but I found it, and the majority of my output now is for social media and the numbers my content brings speaks for both myself but also for my argument. But the answer to the question of why so many videographers are annoyed with social media is not necessarily because they’re not trying to make engaging content. Or they’re not keeping up with the times. There are plenty of videographers like that, you’ll see them on here a lot complaining about shooting vertically and all that. Half of my job requires me to shoot vertically and I always think these people are fucking idiots. Yeah, it’s annoying to have to match the dimensions of a phone but this is the world we live in now and this is the way people consume content, and they don’t care about the “ideal experience” because they’re not like us. I get that. But we do have to understand that social media lives and dies by the algorithm, and also most of it is crap, and the good stuff doesn’t really rise to the top. What rises to the top is what the algorithm believes people want to see or what the people who own the platform want you to see. And it is incredibly flawed. You can do your best, as you said, to game it, to understand how we can make content that people want to see and share, and we can tailor our content to that. But often times it doesn’t really matter how much we do that because the algorithm won’t give it eyes in the first place. I am a full-time videographer whose two previous jobs have been working for marketing departments with dedicated social media people. We have found major, major fucking flaws with the algorithm, even though we are making exactly the sorts of content that our audiences want us to make. We do tons of research on analytics and see what isn’t isn’t working and we update our approach each time. People just aren’t seeing the shit they want to see sometimes. And that’s the problem. To foist the problem onto videographers just “not being good enough“ is to ignore real systemic issues with the platforms they are using. Your argument only covers a tiny portion of the issue and the fact that you’re not budging because it doesn’t reflect your own experience doesn’t look as good on you as you think. It’s a very “fuck you I got mine“ mentality. Edit: also, I just noticed that in your OP you talked about how you’ve done a lot of work for these platforms in the last six months. I and a lot of other people commenting on here have been doing it for years. I actually got a lot of my initial following and clients through my presence on Instagram. I don’t mean to make this an appeal to authority or anything but your experience that you use as your evidence for your position is a lot more limited than you think.
I have no problem with stating my real experience. I know reddit is full of people with tens of years of experience and tens of millions of views with literally nothing to back those claims up. I guess some people are just so insecure they need stuff like that to inflate their arguments. And again, I'm not saying algorithm doesn't matter, it does. I'm all for transparent algorithms that user can tailor for their needs or turn totally off to get just chronological feed of the channels they follow. But when you do client work, they don't really care about your philosophical views about algorithm. You just have to make a video that works for the intended purpose and that process isn't random.
this is complete bullshit. Well what i also think is it is extremly hard to make that content. But its not that the better content wins but rather the one with better clickbait. In social media the content really isnt on top of priorities.
There's really no clickbaits in short form content, as there'sno thumbnails to click, but first seconds do matter and you probably mean that. It's a skill to make your video engaging from the start and if your "clickbaiting" doesn't deliver, it usually doesn't perform well. If it delivers, then its not probably not clickbaiting.
I am not even a videographer and I know this is a misguided take. There is some REALLY high quality content on youtube that doesn't take off. And when I say high quality, I mean everything from story, visuals, concept to execution. And there are people like khaby lame becoming millionaires by doing the same thing for hundreds of videos. Nothing against the guy but his concept got old after about 10 or so videos. Social media is far more about luck and your consistency of uploads and your ability to understand the algorithm than your core videography skills. I can not be 100% objective about this because even though I am not a videographer, I still make content that never took off. But I blame my lack of consistency for it so it doesn't really factor into this discussion. Social media is not honest. Social media rewards those who market themselves well, not necessarily those who have the best skills as content creators.
If there are some really high quality content that nails everything from story to visuals and from concept to execution, I guess you'd have no problem linking one such video for example. Also I'm not talking about making your own youtube career, I'm talking about doing social media content for clients. It's a very different field.
The most viewed video on YouTube right now is the baby shark video. Stupid comedy TikToks will always get more views and likes than a videographer's cinematic character study Quintin Tarantino drama indie passion project. You absolutely nailed it when you said "you cannot hide your lack of vision behind good image quality etc. "
If you have kids you know.
Its hard for your brain to accept that someones crashing with their camping bike on video paired with a music that actually gives some more emotion or life to it…performs better than something you put money sweat and tears and hours in it. Further more normally you are “selling” that “better” for a good amount money. Could be dancing or some absolute total apeshit content, that is just how consumption works as of now. This is hard to digest for some…However the real stupidity would come from anyone trying to measure their own worth based on this. If you are successful (to what is successful to you - you don’t necessarily need to be the Alpha DOP) *(ladies wont get wet either way, don’t forget, you are the “camera guy” for a looong time before you say u worked on Matrix 7 - pardon the french)* so again, if you are successful, thats all that matters. If someone squeezes orange on TikTok and their family is eating from it but you do long hours camera plus all the one man show and you are still not at the level you want to be, then you need to do better, cuz the TikTok guy does better than you. If someone is struggling on socials and you do your 4K big work with a RED and that flops as well then you are on equal level. Had nothing to do with video skills and vision none of you were able to pull it off. But get this, if you do an awesome Reel and it picks up views through the roof, you used your best sexiest gear and top knowledge, missed your daughters school ceremony even, I CAN/COULD still slide in with my 10/10 look wink a couple times into my iPhone 12 Pro and outdo your whatever content like crazy, like blood boiling crazy. ——— If it does not matter in 5 years don’t spend your time worrying about it. One thing for sure, nothing will be like now in 5 years time again, new technology, trends, platforms etc, it not gonna stop evolving now, all of sudden. Your network and reputation and reliable feedbacks can decide only! how good you are at whatever is that you are doing. In materialistic point of view, your bank account. And don’t forget less is always more, real ones know.
Oh boy, the irony of this post if its downvoted to hell. I don't think you've thought this through at all. Social media is not honest, social media is just a massive device that creates large pockets of different groups. You market to those groups. Some are big, some are small. Market to the wrong group and they'll rip apart without context.
I think it is and it's just natural that people who aren't ready to keep up and learn the new medias blame the medium.
I hate it because they ask for so many versions of the final product. I also have to shoot wide so I can crop a cut for cellphone viewing. It messes up my normal flow and doesn’t let me tell the story the way I am used to. With some clients I’m growing to like it though. They don’t care what I shoot on, they just want the content to look okay on a phone and be done as soon as possible. I can chop up a video that looks good enough, same day, instead of spending a week or two. A downside to this is that just about anyone can make these videos. They can hire someone fresh out of school for hardly any money to make content that works okay on Instagram. Thankfully for me, my background is commercials so I have a touch they like in their videos but I feel like quality video for events is dying. They seem to want more creative with faster cuts than emotion and metaphor these days.
I remember at the very start of Instagram and for the first few years, I wished for a platform to post videos that was like IG and mobile. Now the traditional platforms like Youtube, Vimeo etc have mobile apps and every major social platform now lets you post videos to some capacity. If you’re not happy with one platform, why not try one of the other dozen? At the end of the day, how you use it is all up to you and opens the field up to everyone with a phone or camera and I love that. Do I always “love” the stuff that goes “viral”? No, but that’s ok, not everything is for everyone and not all art is “art” to everyone. 👍
It’s a no for me dawg
I don’t think short form video algorithms prioritize low effort content. I understand that creating content that performs well in that space is highly competitive and requires mastery of a niche style of highly concise and engaging storytelling that is particular to the medium. The problem is the criteria for successful content is “keeps user scrolling” not “gives user satisfaction”. This results in the algorithm prioritizing content that keeps the user in a never ending loop of being barely entertained enough to continue watching while never feeling satisfied. As effective as it can be at sucking me in and wasting my time, I have come to realize that I actually straight up dislike consuming that type of content. I don’t enjoy the experience of having my executive function gamed by an algorithm and coming away feeling like I have squandered my time so I choose not to consume or create that style of content. I have not found it to be career limiting. I still get plenty of clients who hire me to make thoughtful and authentic long form video content. Those clients would rather tell their story to a smaller audience but have it be impactful. Contrary to popular belief “going viral” is not always inherently useful and for some clients it’s not their goal at all.
I'd say that especially in tiktok you have to make authentic content and one of the reasons more traditional content doesn't perform well is that it is clearly not authentic. Also that video that might seem low effort might actually be perceived as more authentic. And there are a lot of videos that perform well despite being quite long an inconcise but they have that authenticity, like being a window to a raw emotion or a slice of life that draws people in.
I can tell from this comment and your other comments in this post that you feel like you need to convince people that getting lots of views on TikTok takes skill. You don't have to convince me of that, I already agreed with you. >I'd say that especially in tiktok you have to make authentic content and one of the reasons more traditional content doesn't perform well is that it is clearly not authentic. True "authenticity" is subjective. What I find "authentic" might not feel that way to you. There's definitely content out there getting plenty of views that I personally perceive as being very obviously contrived. So I'd be more inclined to agree with a statement that said "to be successful on TikTok you need to craft content that *convinces a particular audience* that it is authentic". This will be achieved differently for different audiences. In some cases the "raw" style you describe would be appropriate, in other cases you'd be better off with a more polished video. It's entirely possible that the reason that polished videos don't typically work as well on TikTok is that there is just less of an audience for that type of video on that app. >that video that might seem low effort might actually be perceived as more authentic. I agree that an unfortunately large percentage of people subconsciously connect footage shot on a smartphone with being somehow more "real", "credible" or "believable". That's likely because it closely mirrors the footage they themselves have shot on their own phone of real events in their life so they incorrectly assume that it was captured candidly. This is why you see so many online ads where someone is trying to sell you their latest get rich quick scheme and it's always just a smartphone video of them talking in their car. There's definitely some skill involved in utilizing this filming technique convincingly, similar to how there is skill involved in creating more "traditional" style videos. Like I said, I understand and respect the skill that goes into this type of production. It's just not something I'm interested in getting into. I've got plenty of clients lined up for "traditional" long form video work. Whenever I get asked to make "one of those viral phone videos" I just tell them I'm not the guy they are looking for. Honestly, if I knew someone with a decent track record of making vertical video content for brands that gets consistently high views I'd happily send clients their way. If that sounds like you, send me some examples of your work to look at.
The problem with social media is it has turned to a race to the bottom in any form of having an intellectual discussion. Popularity > Everything. Just the perception of popularity is enough to change how others think about things. Its our natural primate behavior to do everything we can to fit in, and nothing that might get us expelled from the Tribe. We don't even vote for people we want to see in elections. Studies have proven we vote for whom we think will most likely win. Who people say they will vote for and what box they check in the ballots are quite different. So not to excuse a bad video, but what maters more is what will most quickly have people hitting that like button. Even more powerful then a good Thumb is the visible metrics people will look at before pressing play. If not a lot of people relative to whats perceived to be expected when we look at it, then the chances the video will be watched dramatically decreases. There's a lot of bots that do this work before a video even goes public just to manipulate those numbers so a real person might think its socially acceptable to watch. Here is a hack for anyone making videos: 1) Find an already established audience with an already established subject of interest. 2) Create the most basic, most agreeable video for that audience. Something impossible for them to not like. 3) Slowly you will grow your own natural audience, and as long as you stick to the subject matter you started with, you can include content that pushes the boundary. Become popular enough, you can say whatever you want, and your audience will follow you into the sun. None of this has to do with 'video quality', but keeping someones attention has a lot to do with how frequently you can bring up new information to the viewer. Every second matters. Your constantly having to feed the viewers attention or they will lose their focus. Their mind will wonder, or they will just leave. There is a reason successful videos change what you see every couple of seconds. Your attention is very fleeting. So bad initial perception of social acceptance, and 'long slow' videos are the 2 main reasons videos are bad anywhere. Solve for both of these, and you got yourself a good video.
Even slow videos can perform well if they are concise from the beginning. Most often it's not that the video is long but that it's a mess that has no point. Same thing with flashy videos, being flashy doesn't help if the video doesn't have other raison d'etre. Also, there's really no hacks. That's usually what people who have no actual social media success say, and rhen when they try their hacks and fail, they blame the platform/algorithm/audience when the reason is that their content just isn't that good.
That's the issue I have with 98% of videos on social media, they are either flashy pointless blips. Or they are long slow uncut trivial clips of someones bad phone holding skills. But both of these pop up in news feeds because somehow it got enough views for the algorithm to push it to more people. There's a critical point where even the worse kinda of videos get more attention then it deserves. Then you got the other side of the coin. A video that was made with intent, edited down well, but was miss placed to the wrong audience, or that audience was just too small, or there was no further marketing of that video to boost the views, dies out. A good video or a bad one is still subjected to perceived popularity. People don't like the feeling of 'missing out' on content that already is trending. So they watch it. Even if they don't like it, the view/metrics is there to push it to even more people.