Online video approaches, innovation

16 responses to “Online video approaches, innovation”

1. Dean Betz writes:
   

   I gave up after a minute of of exposition but no narrative. I’m guessing I’m not alone. Some rules still apply.

   October 31, 2008 at 11:38 am
2. Izzy Gould writes:
   

   The first 2 minutes is way too lonnnnng. I wanted to close out the window.

   October 31, 2008 at 12:04 pm
3. Peg Achterman writes:
   

   Reminds me of Farkas’ “Interviews-50 cents” – I agreed that the lead in was too long. A few of these would have been fun…but too long.
   So – not that innovative IMHO and needed to think more about holding attention.

   October 31, 2008 at 12:20 pm
4. Karim Amara writes:
   

   This piece totally works, it’s a art/journalism mash-up. That first minute is great because he’s getting genuine moments as they wait for the call of action. Not everything needs to be TV news or freaking Frontline. Journalism can be art.

   October 31, 2008 at 1:53 pm
5. Lisa Scheid writes:
   

   I may be the only person but I thought it was beautiful. Could have been tighter in the first few minutes. Has viral potential, I think. It’s immitatable – which is the highest compliment on youtube.

   October 31, 2008 at 1:58 pm
6. stk writes:
   

   Uuuuuh, this is nice! I disagree partly with the too-long-exposition-critique — yes, it _is_ long, but the desire to find out the actual question and the visuals kept me entertained. I actually watched it all the way to the very last second (kind of a “humm, what would I wish for?” moment) despite being very easily distracted usually ;D

   October 31, 2008 at 2:54 pm
7. John Boor writes:
   

   Touching and engaging. I agree that the first couple minutes could have been compressed. But, who needs narrative and why must the rules always apply? That’s one of the components that added to its beauty. It was intuitive and simple in its intent, yet it spoke volumes about the human condition.

   October 31, 2008 at 3:29 pm
8. Luca Conti writes:
   

   I totally love it.

   Thank You for sharing.

   October 31, 2008 at 4:07 pm
9. Paul Balcerak writes:
   

   I liked it a lot, but I think I just-so-happened to be in the mood to watch it. I could see myself getting distracted fast at the wrong time and never coming back to it.

   I think basically a shorter version of the same thing (compress the first two minutes into 20 seconds, etc.) would be ideal.

   October 31, 2008 at 4:13 pm
10. Mindy writes:
    

    This is cool — I’m intrigued by the mix of opinions.

    October 31, 2008 at 4:15 pm
11. Nick Bergus writes:
    

    I, too, felt that the open was too long, but I wonder if it would have worked with a shorter one. The buildup gives the question some gravitas it wouldn’t otherwise have had.

    October 31, 2008 at 4:50 pm
12. Josh writes:
    

    Regardless of whether you like the video or not, the most amazing thing about is that it was shot with a Canon HV20, which is a total cheapie camera you can buy online for under $600. They get the film-like quality by adding a DIY 35mm SLR adapter. It’s pretty amazing quality for that level of camera.

    October 31, 2008 at 5:11 pm
13. Becky writes:
    

    I’m thinking of how to apply this. New man on the street? Would it work as well with the issue of the day, or only with big dreamy questions? I’m probably going to try this a few ways.

    October 31, 2008 at 6:02 pm
14. Mindy writes:
    

    I think there is a kind of tenderness to this that we don’t often see in journalistic video.

    October 31, 2008 at 6:46 pm
15. Mark Berkey-Gerard writes:
    

    I’m sitting in my office feeling thankful that I teach journalism. Thanks.

    November 3, 2008 at 10:08 am
16. Benjamin Reece writes:
    

    thank you guys for the kind words and criticism! Looking forward to sharing with you guys the bigger project that has come out of this:

    http://fiftypeopleonequestion.com

    new video is coming extremely soon…

    November 3, 2008 at 11:44 am

Leave a Reply