ext_7847 (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
absolutedestiny.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
vidding_livejournal_ark22006-01-29 03:51 pm
absolutedestiny.livejournal.com) wrote in vidding_livejournal_ark22006-01-29 03:51 pm
Feedback 1/3: Boom. (also Intention, Audience and Why Vid discussion)
A few weeks ago I offered to give some feedback on 3 vids. This is the first piece of feedback I'm giving.
This particular piece will also debate some of the issues raised by the vid - namely those of the authorial intention of vidders, the importance of context, the relationship between vid and audience, the question of why different people vid and more!
Note for Brits: From this moment on, when this article refers to "football" it is the American Football variant rather than the beautiful game.
Vid: "Boom" by![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
kitakatzz
Song: "Boom" by P.O.D
Fandom: Stargate Atlantis (a fandom I know absolutely nothing about, so bear that in mind)
This vid is a perfect vid to start off this foray into spurious acts of feedback charity. For several reasons, in fact. First, there are simple things to improve upon, so advice on editing methods and technicalities are sure to be useful. Second the vidder is keen about making vids and that's a good thing. Third, it allows me to elucidate about some of the interesting meta-ponderings that this sort of vid inspires which makes it a useful thing for other readers too. What I don't know presently is how much the vidder is keen to learn or how much further they want to take their hobby. I guess what it comes down to is whether this vidder will want to move onto more mature and involved works or whether they are happy making vids of a similar nature with perhaps some improved editing. I'm going to offer advice the way I see it and whatever the vidder wishes to do with this advice is fine by me.
Enter, Evil Critic
If I were to judge this vid in light of the vast amount of talent there is in the fan video creation world I could be fairly cruel about it. An unsympathetic and overly reductionist view of this vid would read something like this:
This kind of commentary, thankfully, is unforgivable. No matter how many valid criticisms a review like this may contain it is completely crushing. The vidder can only have two responses to this:
1) "I'm never making vids again."
2)" Fuck you, asshole - I'll make any kind of vid I like. I have friends who like my vids so I dont have to take this shit from you."
I'm sure some people out there would like #1 but those people are cunts. If someone is keen about producing any artistic work then nurturing is the only fair response. Also, this sort of criticism is only justified from a purely selfish position as it does not take into account the reason why this vid was made: The vidder wanted to make it and they enjoyed doing so. Art is masturbation as it is produced primarily for self gratification. "Good" art is mutual masturbation, providing stimulus to artist and audience alike. So, while it is fair to harshly criticise a piece of commercial entertainment for failing to arouse, it is clearly unfair to rip a fan work to pieces simply for failing to please.
That's the thing, really. I didn't enjoy this video very much personally and I didn't think it made any attempt to appeal on a deeper level but it's possible that it might appeal to others as much as it appealed to the vidder when they made it. It is what it is. The scarce description reveals this instantly - "Sheppard loves football. I love Sheppard. This is what came of it." What we have here is a collection of memorable (I presume) scenes from SG:A matched with an upbeat nu metal track garnished with humorous football comparisons. People who think the show is cool and the music is cool have a good chance of thinking that this vid is also cool. For me, I would like to see something much much more (or something else entirely). So, before I go into what could be done to make much much more out of a vid like this I will treat the vid on its more superficial merits as they are likely the parts that will appeal to the kinds of people who would like a vid like this.
Boom as simple action entertainment with comic undertones and character love.
I presume that this is supposed to be a cool vid that shows what's great about John and the ensemble of SG:A by matching this punchy music to the action and comedy of the show. There's nothing wrong with that. I have been known to make the occasional trivial vid myself. However, there is much to learn about how to make things exciting, appealing and generally "AWSM". I'll talk about that later. First, what about some of the things the vid does do?
Well, there's a clear and honest tongue-in-cheek affection for Sheppard. From the the cheeky schoolboy "haha" sync at the start to the comic misfire with the gun at the end, this vid manages to take this idea of the character and present it not-too-seriously AND not-too-comically. That's not bad going, given that there's no real narrative structure in the video and very few lyrical hooks to add to this idea. So despite the fact that this video doesn't really have anything deep to say about this character, it does present John in a particular way that the vidder obviously has affection for. I'm certain that some people see this character differently but it can't be denied that this vid is very expressive of the vidder's impression of this character. That's really great - it's what vid fandom is all about, reacting to something and expressing these ideas about it in a creative output. Sure it's a million miles away from "vidding deeper" but it is a step toward more involved fandom work.
I bet there are a lot of sections in this vid that would also have added appeal to someone familiar with the show. When a vid has no narrative the scenes have no context. This can be fine for an audience familiar with the fandom but without a point of reference the vid becomes a mostly random collection of scenes that in some way match the lyrics. Again, this works fine for the vidder's scope but additionally I think it's possible to use simple narrative tricks to offer context in the visuals that can guide a viewer who is seeing the scenes for the first time. This is an important technique in furthering a message in a vid. How many people reading this know all sorts of things about a fandom only through its vids? That's the power of visual narratives.
Using Simple Narrative Tricks
Openings are important. I'm sure your English teacher has told you this before. Humans rely heavily on established conventions in order to communicate and interpret - if you greeted your best friend with "Reporting for duty, SIR!" they'd probably give you pretty strange looks. So, when you introduce you have to think of what's appropriate. Same goes with vids. This vid uses an episode excerpt to introduce the football theme. In terms of matching with the aforementioned portrayal of John's character, it works pretty well. Now, once the song starts there's a musical introduction and at this point the audience are relying on the visual narrative. Starting with the football players is good as that's the visual metaphor which is vital to the vid... but what image follows it? Some image of an elevator or something... I don't understand this image (I've not seen the show) but from what I can tell there is no visual connection between the image I saw before and the image I'm seeing now. What am I associating these football players with? Then some equally (to me) disparate images are cut on the beats - a helicopter, some people running, etc. I used to do this sort of thing in my early videos - find random action and movement clips to cut on the beat to match the drums in the music... but this is what you do when you need filler. This is the introduction - there can be no filler. The introduction set up the audience for what they are going to watch - you have to tell them what the vid is going to be about. This introduction says "Football and random action scenes" which is unfair on the vid.
Conventions. Important. The section after the football tackle (00:30) is better at establishing a narrative. There's some evil-looking spaceships and a dissolve suggests that John is considering them with intrepidation. Then there is an attack on urban areas. This visual narrative to me (having not seen the show) suggests invasion. Maybe it is. If so, perhaps the idea is to equate this intergalactic war with football. Right, so now I have my point of reference.
"haha"
Then John appears, synched with the laugh. In terms of narrative this would say to me "ok, he thinks it's funny, like a game". I'm not sure that's really the message that we are supposed to be getting about John. The contrast between the invasion images and the schoolboy smirk is too stark. Really, not enough care has been taken to ensure that the narrative follows a logical path. Individually, a lot of these sequences work fine but place these sequences together and they are at odds with each other.
If you are making a vid where you know you are going to have this defiant laugh at 00:34 then you can build up to it. Instead of showing general images about the overall story of the show you can show an aspect of John's personal involvement in the conflict. Then when it comes to the defiant laugh it can be in the context of him mastering is own battles with the enemy. This would say something completely different about the character, sure, but that's the trick - working out what you want to say about the character and seeing if your visual narrative actually says that. To me the juxtaposition of invasion scenes with John's cheeky laugh felt misplaced, probably because it was unintentional, but that's the kind of attention to detail that can really help a vid out. The audience is fairly forgiving - every drum beat with heavy riff doesn't have to have some big action sequence. It's better to choose the scenes that fit the narrative development of the video than to choose scenes that fit that particular piece of music but do nothing for the narrative.
Stuck in the fandom?
Of course, one of the big problems is that I don't have any context for any of these scenes and so can only gain context from their narrative use in the video. When editing a show you are massively familiar with, it is easy to fall into the trap of using scenes that have a very particular context in the original show. Sometimes it's not even a trap - sometimes it's vital to making a good vid. You just have to look at early Laura Shapiro vids for good examples of vids that work on a nigh transcendent level when you are familiar with the show. So, I'm not saying that every vid should be created as if nobody has seen the show but you should ask yourself "am I leaving enough hints around that people who dont know as much as I do will understand what I'm trying to say?". For this, having vid beta testers who haven't seen a lot of the show is very handy. At the least, just try and check over the story that your images are saying (especially in the instrumental sections where the story isn't being guided by the lyrics). Your vid will be better for it.
What is it saying? Is it saying what you want it to say?
This is should be your goal first and foremost. If a vid doesn't say what you wanted it to say then it's going to be hard for an audience to accept it on any other level. Other things like having excitement, comedy, heartbreak, whatever can come later. In fact these things can only successful if the audience can follow you. You can check any of your fave vids and they are certain to have very a good visual narrative. Good visual narrative works often on a subconscious level. Bad narrative also works subconsciously - people will think the video was bad but not necessarily know why. Now, I'm not saying every vid has to have a big story or anything, but a simple story (such as Humble start > Troubled middle > Victorious end) can do wonders. There are plenty to choose from so go with whatever works for your message:
With the vid idea being "John is awesome and sometimes goofy" a conceivable narrative could be
Blood from a stone.
If your song can't carry your message then you are using the wrong song. Period. So, before you start, have a think about what the message of your song is and if it could be applied to what you want to say. With Boom, the message expressed by the lyrics is something like this:
"I started out small, now I'm in the big time, I've taken you by surprise and you're in for more of them. I can handle myself. I'm in control now."
So you then apply this to the character. But hold on... what about that introduction with the "Hey let me show you about football" and all the quirky John stuff? It's at odds with the song. This is the essential pitfall of the video - the song isn't right for this message. I can see why the song was picked - the BOOM refrain can be used with the football clips, scene by scene there are chances for all kinds of "John rocks" stuff - but does it fit completely with this portrayal of the character? In my opinion there were several video ideas fighting with each other here. One is the "John's rise as Mr Awesome", another is "the conflict is like football and John is leading the team" and another is "John kicks ass but he's kinda funny too". It is possible to have vids that contain all sorts of different elements but it's more likely that they are different perspectives on one theme rather than many different themes that are at odds with each other. My advice, pick your theme early on and stick to it. If you chose "John kicks ass but he's kinda funny too" then I'd recommend a different song. The other options are much more doable.
Making things AWSM
As I mentioned before, even if you do a vid without a great deal to say, there are ways to make things entertaining. Action videos, for example, can rely purely on editing together fight scenes to make an enjoyable video. The trick with a shallow vid is to find some other way to move the audience. Usually audiences read narratives and follow those so if you don't have any real narratives you can have the audience follow the interplay between sound and visuals. With a strong focus on the way something sounds matched closely to the way footage moves, a vid can become like a captivating dance. There's no story, per se, but there is plenty of flow and rhythm. These vids are shiny; they aim to work as spectacle. Spectacle vids can actually be damaged by having too much to say. Boom cannot work on a purely spectacular level because it takes the lyrics too seriously - actually trying to use them to say things about the characters (such as equating the ensemble with "my crew"). When there is no overall narrative, things like this don't have a context. If, however, the lyrics were interpreted in a more more generic way and the primary focus of the vids was about movement, action and spectacle then this essentially shallow vid could become really entertaining.
And its not like there's no attempt to create spectacle in Boom. The vidder uses fade to white on cymbals at key transition points, there's a fair amount of action synch and on occasion good use of motion (though it's not nearly consistent enough to keep the viewers interest in the motion alone). One failing, however, is the inconsistency between internal motion (things moving in the footage) and external motion such as dissolves and other effects added onto the video. Sometimes an effect is used where really a piece of footage should be used instead such as the fade to white at 1:06. That was begging for a scene of John moving before the cut of the football tackle - firstly because the it would flow nicely into the action chorus and secondly because it would develop an association between the football events and John's character. By having the fade to white on the music it actually separates these unnecessarily. It breaks up the visual progression. If you focus on pacing, motion and climax in the footage and editing these things will match with your music and create a fun video to watch. It's much harder than it sounds and good vidders rip their hair out trying to use good motion and well-paced cuts in a video but when it works it is a joyous thing to watch.
Technicalities and general editing practices
The final part of this analysis revolves around a real take-it-or-leave-it part of vidding: technical concerns. Like most things, this is only as important as you want it to be. If a video looks clear enough, sounds good enough and plays smoothly enough then it's probably good enough. However, in my opinion there are some very small things that can improve a vid - they aren't hard to do either. The first thing is to get rid of the divx logo. If you are editing with divx files you may notice that divx put a logo on at the start when the file is played. If you edit with this footage the divx logo is then forever imprinted on your video at the start of new clips. This, thankfully, can be avoided. If you use windows (which I presume you do) then go to the Start Menu, Programs, Divx and look for Decoder Configuration. Go to the Quality Settings tab and check "Disable logo". Done.
Another simple thing that can be fixed is popped frames. A popped frame is where a frame or two from a different scene appears at the start or end of a clip that you want to use - the unwanted scene flashes up just for a moment and while most people don't notice them much it does have an effect on the flow (even subconsciously). Vidders often get a sixth sense for these popped frames and it's worth checking through the video so that the start and end of the clips are from the correct scenes.
Generally the editing choice is fine. Again, try and think at all times about the significance of the scenes, the cuts you are using and the effects you are using. In the bridge you use greyscale when the tone of the music changes. Conventionally that is used for flashbacks and so on - was that how it was used here? I didn't get that impression. Sure a change of visuals was important but I'm not sure whether greyscale was the correct choice. It's not enough to choose something arbitrarily, there needs to be a good justification if you want the audience to accept your editing decisions. The same goes for using dissolves instead of straight cuts - dissolves suggest drifting passage of time, one thing becoming another... too many and they make your vid too soft. Well-timed straight cuts are almost always preferred over dissolves for everyday uses.
Like much of the advice in this article, constant focus and attention to detail are key. The best vidders are painfully perfectionist about their work but equally they wouldn't have it any other way.
Is all this worth it?
Precision editing can be a long, arduous process filled with pain - but the end result can be very satisfying. It all depends on what you want from vidding. From a certain point of view, Boom is actually a perfect vid. It plays around with some fun footage, features good character moments and uses a song the vidder likes. As a personal project, Boom does what the vidder wanted. Who could ask for more? If the vidder wanted to go further there are nearly limitless additional options. Some vidders like the challenge and results that complex, precisely composed vids can offer but each person enters this hobby for a different reason. Other vidders like to make vids that appeal to fandom in general and will work hard to make their vids appeal to the greatest number of people. I know vidders who make vids just for other vidders. It all depends on what you want from the hobby. Watch your shows, listen to your music, make your vids, enjoy them and be proud.
kitakatzz: I hope you find some of this discussion useful. If you want to ask me about any particular aspects of what I've said or about other parts of your video then feel free to ask.
@everyone else: Feel free to comment on any of the ideas presented here. The whole point of this kind of feedback is to get people talking about these basic issues and thinking about how they relate to vids and vid fandom.
This particular piece will also debate some of the issues raised by the vid - namely those of the authorial intention of vidders, the importance of context, the relationship between vid and audience, the question of why different people vid and more!
Note for Brits: From this moment on, when this article refers to "football" it is the American Football variant rather than the beautiful game.
Vid: "Boom" by
kitakatzzSong: "Boom" by P.O.D
Fandom: Stargate Atlantis (a fandom I know absolutely nothing about, so bear that in mind)
This vid is a perfect vid to start off this foray into spurious acts of feedback charity. For several reasons, in fact. First, there are simple things to improve upon, so advice on editing methods and technicalities are sure to be useful. Second the vidder is keen about making vids and that's a good thing. Third, it allows me to elucidate about some of the interesting meta-ponderings that this sort of vid inspires which makes it a useful thing for other readers too. What I don't know presently is how much the vidder is keen to learn or how much further they want to take their hobby. I guess what it comes down to is whether this vidder will want to move onto more mature and involved works or whether they are happy making vids of a similar nature with perhaps some improved editing. I'm going to offer advice the way I see it and whatever the vidder wishes to do with this advice is fine by me.
Enter, Evil Critic
If I were to judge this vid in light of the vast amount of talent there is in the fan video creation world I could be fairly cruel about it. An unsympathetic and overly reductionist view of this vid would read something like this:
As Sturgeon wisely informed us, 90% of everything is shit. While it is no doubt desirable to praise the glories of the modern remix culture, every movement creates a lot of crap. "Boom" is not only typical of this, it is (unknowingly) a metaphor for the deluge of trash fan media that arrives with the dawn of each new fandom. "Here comes the boom" is a grim prophecy foreseeing the death of artistic hobbyism - bludgeoned by the blunt hands of eager morons. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing... and by nothing I mean "John likes football. He's awesome - BOOM just like when someone is tackled playing football. I love John, he rocks." This video has no merits. There is no insight into character ("John likes football" and "John rocks" are not insights), no narrative structure and, more importantly, no entertainment value over watching the actual show. Adding music to this footage does not add to the viewing experience. The editing is far from high-octane and the juxtaposition of sound and visuals is at best predictable and at worst baffling. The lyrics of the song are so mundane that any attempt to use them to reveal anything about the show or its characters ends in unintended hilarity. Add to this the overall lack of editing precision and a complete disregard for the language of vidding and you are left with a steaming train wreck of juvenile endeavour. At least, at 20mb, it's disposable - just like the rest of the 90% vids, fic, mashups or any other modern fan hobby output. The only mystery here is why these talentless wastes of space even bother. I suppose if they had the artistic eye to see how terrible these things are they wouldn't be making them in the first place. To be avoided at all cost - 1/10
This kind of commentary, thankfully, is unforgivable. No matter how many valid criticisms a review like this may contain it is completely crushing. The vidder can only have two responses to this: 1) "I'm never making vids again."
2)" Fuck you, asshole - I'll make any kind of vid I like. I have friends who like my vids so I dont have to take this shit from you."
I'm sure some people out there would like #1 but those people are cunts. If someone is keen about producing any artistic work then nurturing is the only fair response. Also, this sort of criticism is only justified from a purely selfish position as it does not take into account the reason why this vid was made: The vidder wanted to make it and they enjoyed doing so. Art is masturbation as it is produced primarily for self gratification. "Good" art is mutual masturbation, providing stimulus to artist and audience alike. So, while it is fair to harshly criticise a piece of commercial entertainment for failing to arouse, it is clearly unfair to rip a fan work to pieces simply for failing to please.
That's the thing, really. I didn't enjoy this video very much personally and I didn't think it made any attempt to appeal on a deeper level but it's possible that it might appeal to others as much as it appealed to the vidder when they made it. It is what it is. The scarce description reveals this instantly - "Sheppard loves football. I love Sheppard. This is what came of it." What we have here is a collection of memorable (I presume) scenes from SG:A matched with an upbeat nu metal track garnished with humorous football comparisons. People who think the show is cool and the music is cool have a good chance of thinking that this vid is also cool. For me, I would like to see something much much more (or something else entirely). So, before I go into what could be done to make much much more out of a vid like this I will treat the vid on its more superficial merits as they are likely the parts that will appeal to the kinds of people who would like a vid like this.
Boom as simple action entertainment with comic undertones and character love.
I presume that this is supposed to be a cool vid that shows what's great about John and the ensemble of SG:A by matching this punchy music to the action and comedy of the show. There's nothing wrong with that. I have been known to make the occasional trivial vid myself. However, there is much to learn about how to make things exciting, appealing and generally "AWSM". I'll talk about that later. First, what about some of the things the vid does do?
Well, there's a clear and honest tongue-in-cheek affection for Sheppard. From the the cheeky schoolboy "haha" sync at the start to the comic misfire with the gun at the end, this vid manages to take this idea of the character and present it not-too-seriously AND not-too-comically. That's not bad going, given that there's no real narrative structure in the video and very few lyrical hooks to add to this idea. So despite the fact that this video doesn't really have anything deep to say about this character, it does present John in a particular way that the vidder obviously has affection for. I'm certain that some people see this character differently but it can't be denied that this vid is very expressive of the vidder's impression of this character. That's really great - it's what vid fandom is all about, reacting to something and expressing these ideas about it in a creative output. Sure it's a million miles away from "vidding deeper" but it is a step toward more involved fandom work.
I bet there are a lot of sections in this vid that would also have added appeal to someone familiar with the show. When a vid has no narrative the scenes have no context. This can be fine for an audience familiar with the fandom but without a point of reference the vid becomes a mostly random collection of scenes that in some way match the lyrics. Again, this works fine for the vidder's scope but additionally I think it's possible to use simple narrative tricks to offer context in the visuals that can guide a viewer who is seeing the scenes for the first time. This is an important technique in furthering a message in a vid. How many people reading this know all sorts of things about a fandom only through its vids? That's the power of visual narratives.
Using Simple Narrative Tricks
Openings are important. I'm sure your English teacher has told you this before. Humans rely heavily on established conventions in order to communicate and interpret - if you greeted your best friend with "Reporting for duty, SIR!" they'd probably give you pretty strange looks. So, when you introduce you have to think of what's appropriate. Same goes with vids. This vid uses an episode excerpt to introduce the football theme. In terms of matching with the aforementioned portrayal of John's character, it works pretty well. Now, once the song starts there's a musical introduction and at this point the audience are relying on the visual narrative. Starting with the football players is good as that's the visual metaphor which is vital to the vid... but what image follows it? Some image of an elevator or something... I don't understand this image (I've not seen the show) but from what I can tell there is no visual connection between the image I saw before and the image I'm seeing now. What am I associating these football players with? Then some equally (to me) disparate images are cut on the beats - a helicopter, some people running, etc. I used to do this sort of thing in my early videos - find random action and movement clips to cut on the beat to match the drums in the music... but this is what you do when you need filler. This is the introduction - there can be no filler. The introduction set up the audience for what they are going to watch - you have to tell them what the vid is going to be about. This introduction says "Football and random action scenes" which is unfair on the vid.
Conventions. Important. The section after the football tackle (00:30) is better at establishing a narrative. There's some evil-looking spaceships and a dissolve suggests that John is considering them with intrepidation. Then there is an attack on urban areas. This visual narrative to me (having not seen the show) suggests invasion. Maybe it is. If so, perhaps the idea is to equate this intergalactic war with football. Right, so now I have my point of reference.
"haha"
Then John appears, synched with the laugh. In terms of narrative this would say to me "ok, he thinks it's funny, like a game". I'm not sure that's really the message that we are supposed to be getting about John. The contrast between the invasion images and the schoolboy smirk is too stark. Really, not enough care has been taken to ensure that the narrative follows a logical path. Individually, a lot of these sequences work fine but place these sequences together and they are at odds with each other.
If you are making a vid where you know you are going to have this defiant laugh at 00:34 then you can build up to it. Instead of showing general images about the overall story of the show you can show an aspect of John's personal involvement in the conflict. Then when it comes to the defiant laugh it can be in the context of him mastering is own battles with the enemy. This would say something completely different about the character, sure, but that's the trick - working out what you want to say about the character and seeing if your visual narrative actually says that. To me the juxtaposition of invasion scenes with John's cheeky laugh felt misplaced, probably because it was unintentional, but that's the kind of attention to detail that can really help a vid out. The audience is fairly forgiving - every drum beat with heavy riff doesn't have to have some big action sequence. It's better to choose the scenes that fit the narrative development of the video than to choose scenes that fit that particular piece of music but do nothing for the narrative.
Stuck in the fandom?
Of course, one of the big problems is that I don't have any context for any of these scenes and so can only gain context from their narrative use in the video. When editing a show you are massively familiar with, it is easy to fall into the trap of using scenes that have a very particular context in the original show. Sometimes it's not even a trap - sometimes it's vital to making a good vid. You just have to look at early Laura Shapiro vids for good examples of vids that work on a nigh transcendent level when you are familiar with the show. So, I'm not saying that every vid should be created as if nobody has seen the show but you should ask yourself "am I leaving enough hints around that people who dont know as much as I do will understand what I'm trying to say?". For this, having vid beta testers who haven't seen a lot of the show is very handy. At the least, just try and check over the story that your images are saying (especially in the instrumental sections where the story isn't being guided by the lyrics). Your vid will be better for it.
What is it saying? Is it saying what you want it to say?
This is should be your goal first and foremost. If a vid doesn't say what you wanted it to say then it's going to be hard for an audience to accept it on any other level. Other things like having excitement, comedy, heartbreak, whatever can come later. In fact these things can only successful if the audience can follow you. You can check any of your fave vids and they are certain to have very a good visual narrative. Good visual narrative works often on a subconscious level. Bad narrative also works subconsciously - people will think the video was bad but not necessarily know why. Now, I'm not saying every vid has to have a big story or anything, but a simple story (such as Humble start > Troubled middle > Victorious end) can do wonders. There are plenty to choose from so go with whatever works for your message:
- Person meets other > person falls in love with other > other falls out with person > person wins other back
- Person has ambition > person achieves > person becomes corrupted > person has tragic end
- Person has nothing > person fights through hardship and doubt > person almost gives up > person perseveres > person succeeds
- etc
- Person has a problem with X (which is a person or thing) > Person clashes with X, loses > Person has another clash with X, loses even worse > Person stresses about about it > Person has final clash with X, wins against odds or falls tragically into the same old trap.
With the vid idea being "John is awesome and sometimes goofy" a conceivable narrative could be
- John tries hard > John messes up a little > John isn't taken seriously > John is upset > John proves himself > John is totally awesome (and goofy, but mostly awesome)
Blood from a stone.
If your song can't carry your message then you are using the wrong song. Period. So, before you start, have a think about what the message of your song is and if it could be applied to what you want to say. With Boom, the message expressed by the lyrics is something like this:
"I started out small, now I'm in the big time, I've taken you by surprise and you're in for more of them. I can handle myself. I'm in control now."
So you then apply this to the character. But hold on... what about that introduction with the "Hey let me show you about football" and all the quirky John stuff? It's at odds with the song. This is the essential pitfall of the video - the song isn't right for this message. I can see why the song was picked - the BOOM refrain can be used with the football clips, scene by scene there are chances for all kinds of "John rocks" stuff - but does it fit completely with this portrayal of the character? In my opinion there were several video ideas fighting with each other here. One is the "John's rise as Mr Awesome", another is "the conflict is like football and John is leading the team" and another is "John kicks ass but he's kinda funny too". It is possible to have vids that contain all sorts of different elements but it's more likely that they are different perspectives on one theme rather than many different themes that are at odds with each other. My advice, pick your theme early on and stick to it. If you chose "John kicks ass but he's kinda funny too" then I'd recommend a different song. The other options are much more doable.
Making things AWSM
As I mentioned before, even if you do a vid without a great deal to say, there are ways to make things entertaining. Action videos, for example, can rely purely on editing together fight scenes to make an enjoyable video. The trick with a shallow vid is to find some other way to move the audience. Usually audiences read narratives and follow those so if you don't have any real narratives you can have the audience follow the interplay between sound and visuals. With a strong focus on the way something sounds matched closely to the way footage moves, a vid can become like a captivating dance. There's no story, per se, but there is plenty of flow and rhythm. These vids are shiny; they aim to work as spectacle. Spectacle vids can actually be damaged by having too much to say. Boom cannot work on a purely spectacular level because it takes the lyrics too seriously - actually trying to use them to say things about the characters (such as equating the ensemble with "my crew"). When there is no overall narrative, things like this don't have a context. If, however, the lyrics were interpreted in a more more generic way and the primary focus of the vids was about movement, action and spectacle then this essentially shallow vid could become really entertaining.
And its not like there's no attempt to create spectacle in Boom. The vidder uses fade to white on cymbals at key transition points, there's a fair amount of action synch and on occasion good use of motion (though it's not nearly consistent enough to keep the viewers interest in the motion alone). One failing, however, is the inconsistency between internal motion (things moving in the footage) and external motion such as dissolves and other effects added onto the video. Sometimes an effect is used where really a piece of footage should be used instead such as the fade to white at 1:06. That was begging for a scene of John moving before the cut of the football tackle - firstly because the it would flow nicely into the action chorus and secondly because it would develop an association between the football events and John's character. By having the fade to white on the music it actually separates these unnecessarily. It breaks up the visual progression. If you focus on pacing, motion and climax in the footage and editing these things will match with your music and create a fun video to watch. It's much harder than it sounds and good vidders rip their hair out trying to use good motion and well-paced cuts in a video but when it works it is a joyous thing to watch.
Technicalities and general editing practices
The final part of this analysis revolves around a real take-it-or-leave-it part of vidding: technical concerns. Like most things, this is only as important as you want it to be. If a video looks clear enough, sounds good enough and plays smoothly enough then it's probably good enough. However, in my opinion there are some very small things that can improve a vid - they aren't hard to do either. The first thing is to get rid of the divx logo. If you are editing with divx files you may notice that divx put a logo on at the start when the file is played. If you edit with this footage the divx logo is then forever imprinted on your video at the start of new clips. This, thankfully, can be avoided. If you use windows (which I presume you do) then go to the Start Menu, Programs, Divx and look for Decoder Configuration. Go to the Quality Settings tab and check "Disable logo". Done.
Another simple thing that can be fixed is popped frames. A popped frame is where a frame or two from a different scene appears at the start or end of a clip that you want to use - the unwanted scene flashes up just for a moment and while most people don't notice them much it does have an effect on the flow (even subconsciously). Vidders often get a sixth sense for these popped frames and it's worth checking through the video so that the start and end of the clips are from the correct scenes.
Generally the editing choice is fine. Again, try and think at all times about the significance of the scenes, the cuts you are using and the effects you are using. In the bridge you use greyscale when the tone of the music changes. Conventionally that is used for flashbacks and so on - was that how it was used here? I didn't get that impression. Sure a change of visuals was important but I'm not sure whether greyscale was the correct choice. It's not enough to choose something arbitrarily, there needs to be a good justification if you want the audience to accept your editing decisions. The same goes for using dissolves instead of straight cuts - dissolves suggest drifting passage of time, one thing becoming another... too many and they make your vid too soft. Well-timed straight cuts are almost always preferred over dissolves for everyday uses.
Like much of the advice in this article, constant focus and attention to detail are key. The best vidders are painfully perfectionist about their work but equally they wouldn't have it any other way.
Is all this worth it?
Precision editing can be a long, arduous process filled with pain - but the end result can be very satisfying. It all depends on what you want from vidding. From a certain point of view, Boom is actually a perfect vid. It plays around with some fun footage, features good character moments and uses a song the vidder likes. As a personal project, Boom does what the vidder wanted. Who could ask for more? If the vidder wanted to go further there are nearly limitless additional options. Some vidders like the challenge and results that complex, precisely composed vids can offer but each person enters this hobby for a different reason. Other vidders like to make vids that appeal to fandom in general and will work hard to make their vids appeal to the greatest number of people. I know vidders who make vids just for other vidders. It all depends on what you want from the hobby. Watch your shows, listen to your music, make your vids, enjoy them and be proud.
kitakatzz: I hope you find some of this discussion useful. If you want to ask me about any particular aspects of what I've said or about other parts of your video then feel free to ask.@everyone else: Feel free to comment on any of the ideas presented here. The whole point of this kind of feedback is to get people talking about these basic issues and thinking about how they relate to vids and vid fandom.