Winge and Moan - video and reviews

[John Fenna]

First of all I would like to say that this moan is not named at any individual or individuals - it is aimed at a phenomena of the web and this day and age!
I love reading reviews and there are lots of folk out in webland and magazineland who have a vast amount of experience of kit and who write up some stunningly useful reviews of kit, tools and other stuff: there are also a load of numpties who seem to think they know a lot but who just plain DO NOT!
Unfortunately, with the unregulated nature of the interweb both varieties of review get equal prominence - at least with magazines there tends to be an 'ed 'itter who will bin writers who prove to be a waste of ink...
As a lot of the numpties seem incapable of stringing coherent sentences together without alternating real words with "erm", "er", "uh" and "like" I blame ease of availability of the video for the rash of less than useful "reviews" infecting the interweb.
The curses of the shaky hand held shot, the miss aimed tripod shot, the "can't hear the voice for the wind" dialogue and the editing containing "let's spend half the review with nothing but meaningless titles", these wacky effects came with the softwear so let's give everyone migraines"
plus inclusion of the "out of focus", to far away to see", "rain on the lens", "my dog is cute so he gets in all my shots" "atmospheric 'me walking into shot from 3 miles away'" shots all add up to making some reviews (for me at least) un-watchable!
Note I have not even mentioned the awful music some "reviewers" inflict on their viewers?
I often find that a few words typed on a page plus a selection of clear (still) photos convey a lot more info in a few seconds, are easier to search for points you wish to look at again and are easier on the eye than 100 times the length of self indulgent videoists works!
I am not saying all video reviews are bad - but the interweb is choking up with the bad ones and even the good ones tend to be of less practical use than a stills photograph and written word review - and finding the good amongst the dross is becoming harder!
Does anyone have a fool proof way of finding only the good reviews out there?
I have some favourite on-line reviewers that I trust but they do not cover everything ...
Please help....

 

[GGTBod]

I bet you feel better after letting that out, i gave up on reviews of all types long ago, I don't buy or read any magazines (online or in print) or newspapers, don't watch video reviews of read them, personally i stopped long ago when there seemed to be a massive rise in the paid reviewer disguising themselves as a satisfied customer, couldn't be chowed to sift through and work out which were paid and which were genuine so just ignore the lot.

A similar thing happened to me with music back in the early 90's i had difficulty discerning which were mass produced music mogul garbage and genuine artists that i just gave up on the lot.

 

[janso]

John; I normally give it about 10-20 secs to grab me before pressing stop. I too can't abide sloppy reviews, chad music and bad footage but I'm unsure of a way to separate the wheat from the chaff. I especially despise those that show no planning on script or background noise!


Sent from my hidey hole using Tapatalk... sssh!

 

[decorum]

You missed the 'I've just bought this, here's me taking it out of the packaging in my house' pseudo-reviews which are, in reality, just first impressions.

A good* review is really hard to get right (certainly beyond my current skills) and although I can admire someone's wish to aim for the stars I do lament the amount who seem happy to hit a low, degrading, orbit .


* Where 'good' equals informative , concise _and_ well put together.


As the old adage says 'Just because you can, doesn't mean you should' and, to my mind, even word of mouth isn't a foolproof method of finding good reviews ~ if you glean no new information from a review you're, in effect, just watching for the scenery and a job well done (and if you're unlucky a bit of kit in a background shot which isn't mentioned but, none the less, looks _interesting_ and causes new forum threads after your Google Fu goes into meltdown :roll eyes: ).

 

[sandbender]

+1 to all of this.

I'm a reader not a watcher.

 

[Goatboy]

Mr. Fenna, I've been reading your reviews since the S.W.A.T. days of the late 80's/early 90's. I know that you put a lot of effort into your work. I also know that due to your past steam powered 'net connection and 'puter that it took a lot of effort for you to put the work up. I will say that some magazine writters were very skewed towards fluffing up the main advertisers products. I never found you in this camp but have entered into dialogue with some editors over this. I found it very important when safety was involved.
On the video reviews there is a huge amount of dross to wade through and it takes time before finding a good one. I do watch YouTube and the likes but have narrowed it down to a few I like as they are succinct, knowledgeable and well done. But of the millions of videos out there I only subscribe to a handful.
Some of the reviewers though not professional on shopping sites like Amazon are quite good, and you know that they've bought and used the item.
So I guess it's like novelists, find one you like and go through their canon of work.

Sent via smoke-signal from a woodland in Scotland.

 

[GGTBod]

I have to say i do love a good comedy review on Amazon, not sure how useful these are for choosing things you may want to buy though, read some of these reviews for example

Sugar free gummy bears

Veet for men

I am not affiliated with either product nor do i recommend them

 

[John Fenna]

I have to say i do love a good comedy review on Amazon, not sure how useful these are for choosing things you may want to buy though, read some of these reviews for example

Sugar free gummy bears

Veet for men

I am not affiliated with either product nor do i recommend them

Good reviews - no video, and well (ish) written, making their points clearly.....

 

[GGTBod]

I guess you could say they gave honest reviews of their experiences with the products, i nearly laughed myself into a choking fit reading the Veet ones, certainly would not want to see video's of the product in use

 

[cranmere]

I tend to look for the shorter length ones John. The vast majority of longer ones are full of completely irrelevant rambling. I don't want to see interminable introductions and someone's life history, I don't want to wait while they move their camera, I don't want to see them do the same thing 3 times over, I want their succinct comments about the item they are reviewing.

 

[Jared]

You missed the 'I've just bought this, here's me taking it out of the packaging in my house' pseudo-reviews which are, in reality, just first impressions.

One of the most successful youtube channels does exactly this, apparently earns around 5 million USD a year. Just unboxing Disney toys.

https://www.youtube.com/user/DisneyCollectorBR

 

[sunndog]

Yup, virtually anything over 10 minutes i skip past.....then they get about 10 seconds to grabe me, if not i just chose another

 

[mountainm]

What bugs me is when folks post up videos on a forum and nothing else...

 

[sunndog]

What bugs me is when folks post up videos on a forum and nothing else...

Aye, and just one post on the thread they started

 

[mountainm]

Aye, and just one post on the thread they started

Yup, gives you the feeling they're only interesting in racking up youtube stats, not on the actual subject matter itself.

 

[decorum]

One of the most successful youtube channels does exactly this, apparently earns around 5 million USD a year. Just unboxing Disney toys.

Yeah, sorry I really should have quantified what I was trying to say by adding 'outdoor goods' . But, to be honest, I really didn't think I needed to .

What bugs me is when folks post up videos on a forum and nothing else...

Same thing applies to blogs ~ 'My blog, have a look, here's the link ...'. In contrast to this, Addo (of this forum) has a really good and informative blog. When he links to it he goes to the effort of doing an abridged version for the forum to act as a taster and then gives the link for those who want to delve further . Addo's not the only blogger who does this, just a good example .

No contest to which link I'll click.

 

[sandbender]

"...When he links to it he goes to the effort of doing an abridged version for the forum ..."

Which is only polite really.

To do otherwise would be like turning up at someones party and then inviting all the other guests to leave and come to your party instead.

 

[bilmo-p5]

I generally only watch a video review if it has been recommended by someone I 'know'. I do, however, trawl Youtube now and then for tutorials, which are similar to reviews in many ways and prone to the same abuses.
I am 100% in agreement with John when he says,

"I often find that a few words typed on a page plus a selection of clear (still) photos convey a lot more info in a few seconds, are easier to search for points you wish to look at again and are easier on the eye than 100 times the length of self indulgent videoists works!"

 

[Squidders]

I agree with all that has been said.

 

[Dark Horse Dave]

Sometimes even those long-winded and waffly Youtube videos can be quite handy though. As an example, sometimes I will fast-forward through one so I can get an idea of the size of a rucksack, pouch, knife or something. You don't have to watch all of it!