Real Estate Blog - a Tale of Two Videos

Home : Blogs : Mike Mueller : Mike Mueller, Social Media.ist

a Tale of Two Videos

This is not yet another WordCamp post - really!

I wanted to illustrate two very different video approaches I came across, both covering the same conference.

I would like you to watch them both and then I want to ask you a couple of questions.

Don’t cheat…

Video 1:

Video 2:

Done watching both? Good. Now answer a couple of questions.

Answer each as honestly as you can. I do not know either of these people personally. There are no wrong answers.

Which video did you watch all the way to the end?
Why? Did you find yourself looking at the time for each one? (honestly?)
Did you notice the sound in each one?
Did you notice the branding for each one?
Which was more compelling / entertaining to you?
What was the best thing you liked from each?
What did you like the least?
How would you make each one better?
What can you take from this and apply to your own video style?

This post brought to you courtesy of Mike Mueller.
Feel free to ReBlog or ReTweet as you like as long as you credit the source (him).
Did you know? He's for hire! He builds Blogs, Graphic Images and Widgets and Facebook Pages and besides… He knows lots of really cool stuff.

Hire Mike (925) 456-4567

Posted by Mike Mueller on 06/04/2009 02:03 PM

Comments (5)

video

Originally posted at: Mike Mueller, Social Media.ist: a Tale of Two Videos

Post is included in group: Video
Post is included in group: Social Media Marketing

5 Comments on a Tale of Two Videos

JUN

Mike - definitely the 2nd one is better. I couldn't quite hear some of the speakers on the first one - but I am sure it was good info.

Mike - Here's what I have:

1. #2

2. For several reasons, which you'll see in my other answers. I did look at the time, but only because I read your questions first.

3. Sound was a big factor. Even with my speakers turned up all the way and headphones in, I could barely hear Mike Ferriss when he started. I stopped shortly after that. If I can't hear a speech, why would I watch it?

4. Branding was generic crowd shots and logos to start the first one. Amy definitely has a particular brand and it was more of the friendly natured funny geek type that I identify with (not that I'm funny).

5. Flat out #1 was a snore fest. Even if I had been able to hear it, I doubt I would have watched the whole thing if given a choice between the two.

6. Amy's notes on what other people were doing caught my attention. Then I got the facts. Humor always catches my attention. #1 - I do like the man on the scene style for some things (I kept up with @rebcden thanks to some of the streams).

7. #1 - sound. #2 - I wanted to know more after being drawn in.

8. Not too sure. Need to think about this one some more.

9. Get a real cam (did you see my plee to the public? - don't want to link it as I feel it would spammy in this case). Use a tripod or stable surface (I have really shaky hands). Learn to edit better. Do more video.

Thanks for always giving us concrete examples Mike...one of the things I like about reading your blogs. You don't just drop the bomb of a concept on everyone, you show us how it works, then let us blow it up ourselves.

#2 all the way - shorter, it was a girl, I'm not even sure what the speaker looked like in #1 because I say "8.55" and said, "yeah ... right". Good humor, quirky, fast screen changes to soothe my ADHD. Would even watch again! :D

JUN

I like the second better but I am going to listen to the first one again.

JUN

Which video did you watch all the way to the end? The second one. After 1 minute, I began skipping through number 1
Why? Did you find yourself looking at the time for each one? (honestly?) I looked at the time of #1. On #2, I didn't look at the time until it was over.
Did you notice the sound in each one? ABSOLUTELY!!!! Sound is the #1 most important thing in a video. People tend to excuse poor video, but will turn away from bad audio.
Did you notice the branding for each one? Not really, to be honest.
Which was more compelling / entertaining to you? The second
What was the best thing you liked from each? #1, not much. #2 more creative, short and to the point. It had a personal feel, but with a professional touch that was subtle enough to make it look personal.
What did you like the least? The second, by far.
How would you make each one better? The first needed better audio, and needed to be shorter for a promo video. For the second, her glasses bugged me :)
What can you take from this and apply to your own video style? Good question. I am a HUGE proponent of doing good video. In my blog post today, oddly enough, I touched this exact subject in detail. Take a look here

This blog does not allow anonymous comments

a Tale of Two Videos

Technology for Humans