Best No-Effects Video

This forum is for the discussion of AMVs for the 2010 Viewers' Choice Awards. This is a temporary forum and will be removed when the contest is done.
User avatar
Kyssifur
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:35 am
Status: I can Ntertain
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Kyssifur » Thu Feb 04, 2010 8:14 am

But they are not 100% effectless.
we are awesome

User avatar
Lirinis
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:24 pm
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Lirinis » Thu Feb 04, 2010 8:25 am

mirkosp wrote:
Lirinis wrote:Isn't it time to remove this category? Any good video has some kind of effects nowadays.

:| That's isn't necessarily true... if you check the finalists, there are good vids in there.

Are they 100% no-effects? 3d camera moves here, masking and keying there, pure effects-driven titles in this one, incidental glow in that one...

User avatar
ngsilver
The Hookah Guy
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 1:22 pm
Status: Calm Your Miniature Colorful Horses
Location: Detroit area
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby ngsilver » Thu Feb 04, 2010 8:43 am

There is this frame of thought that says that the moment you do anything other then a hard cut you are using an effect. I myself don't like to think of cross-fades and fade-to-black as effects, because they are standard live video techniques. Hell, in some respects even simple overlays, partial screens, and lower 3rds are basic live video editing techniques. But I'm not here to argue this...

I'm more concerned with the opinion that a video with no-effects isn't a worthy video. When the hell did this start coming up? This idea annoys me even more then the idea that you have to notice an effect for it to be good. I mean come on. Go back and watch older movies that you saw back in the day and thought were awesome, seriously, do it, then tell me if you think the effects in that movie stand up to your eye now. I do this all the time. In the end the old effects work seems cheesy because now you can notice it. The same can go for any low budget film or TV show that comes out now. When you notice the effect for exactly what it is you generally consider the production to be of lesser quality then some big budget production where the effects are seamless. Well, unless you like the b movie thing...

In the end, there are a TON of great videos that utilize no effects. It's where this hobby came from back when the main way to edit (mostly because it was affordable) was to do hard cuts because, well, you were using a VCR to record the video. It takes a great amount of knowledge and feel for a project in order to portray a story or mood simply through the use of simple editing. And that is something in this day and age where people feel that effects is what makes a video good we seem to have lost sight of.

That's why I feel this category is still valid. It gives editors, like myself, who prefer or try to edit a video using the simplest of techniques a category that they can at least get recognition in. After all, you have to have effects in order to make a video good.......

Well, provided the people voting actually pay attention to the fact this category is suppose to be about not having effects.
ImageImageImage
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Lirinis
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:24 pm
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Lirinis » Thu Feb 04, 2010 9:14 am

ngsilver wrote:There is this frame of thought that says that the moment you do anything other then a hard cut you are using an effect. I myself don't like to think of cross-fades and fade-to-black as effects, because they are standard live video techniques.

Hey, I wasn't talking about fades. I was talking about glows, 3d cameras and such. They are clearly effects.

ngsilver wrote:I'm more concerned with the opinion that a video with no-effects isn't a worthy video. When the hell did this start coming up?

If there were worthy videos without effects, we'd probably had them in the finals.

ngsilver wrote:In the end, there are a TON of great videos that utilize no effects. It's where this hobby came from back when the main way to edit (mostly because it was affordable) was to do hard cuts because, well, you were using a VCR to record the video.

So, there's nothing cool in making a no-effects video. Dinosaurs made hardcuts, cause they couldn't afford effects, not because their videos were going to be better with hardcuts.

ngsilver wrote:That's why I feel this category is still valid. It gives editors, like myself, who prefer or try to edit a video using the simplest of techniques a category that they can at least get recognition in.

The category is valid, because it's your only chance to win anything? Come on, it's not an argument.

ngsilver wrote:It takes a great amount of knowledge and feel for a project in order to portray a story or mood simply through the use of simple editing. And that is something in this day and age where people feel that effects is what makes a video good we seem to have lost sight of.


If your "simplest techniques" had any power, you could win a normal category with it, say, best drama or best storytelling.

Giving an award for not using effects is just like giving an award for coding in DivX instead of h264. It's sooo hard to get good quality with DivX!

User avatar
ngsilver
The Hookah Guy
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 1:22 pm
Status: Calm Your Miniature Colorful Horses
Location: Detroit area
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby ngsilver » Thu Feb 04, 2010 9:56 am

By your reply, and your massive ability to overlook what I was actually talking about, I rest my case.
ImageImageImage
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Otohiko
Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 8:32 pm
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Otohiko » Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:01 am

I think you're confusing taste with quality. I think the boundary is now blurring and definitely even in simplest videos bits of masking or glow or 3D motion pop up these days, but on the whole... I think this category is NOT something to force people into making videos without using available tools. Rather, it's just to cater to a particular preference, both among editors and viewers. There are still people out there that like montage videos, and there are editors out there who make them as a choice, not as a 'dinosaur' of inability. On the other hand in some circles, which are very prevalent in voting these days, effects are a big factor; as a result, some people get bitter that a basic subjective taste preference among a lot of audiences for effects is overruling others' taste preference for simpler montage. This category is a compromise to let neither side be offended and for editors who are primarily concerned with montage and internal sync rather than external visuals (i.e. effects) to feel a) at home; b) not like they're being bullied into using effects to elicit good audience response.

Honestly, it's been a favourite category of mine over the years. I'm not too too thrilled with it this year, and maybe something needs to be done to its name, but I'm tempted to just tempted to say something like "bah, kids these days!". This is a matter of taste and, on the VCAs behalf, to allow more room for particular tastes to be presented.
The Birds are using humanity in order to throw something terrifying at this green pig. And then what happens to us all later, that’s simply not important to them…

User avatar
Lirinis
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:24 pm
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Lirinis » Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:38 am

It's alright with tastes. The name and the definition are both misleading and incorrect.

this video shows that it does not need special effects to be interesting, compelling, or memorable. Entrants to this category will be limited to basic edits like cuts, simple transitions, simple text, and very subtle masking (such as lip flap removal).

This heavily contradicts the reality and should be at least updated.

User avatar
Nya-chan Production
The :< point of view
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 11:21 am
Status: White bracelet
Location: Ward 7F
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Nya-chan Production » Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:46 am

Lirinis wrote:It's alright with tastes. The name and the definition are both misleading and incorrect.

this video shows that it does not need special effects to be interesting, compelling, or memorable. Entrants to this category will be limited to basic edits like cuts, simple transitions, simple text, and very subtle masking (such as lip flap removal).

This heavily contradicts the reality and should be at least updated.

Why should the people who do these videos pay for some jerks who can't categorize vids properly?
Image

User avatar
Bauzi
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:48 pm
Status: Under High Voltage
Location: Austria (uhm the other country without kangaroos^^)
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Bauzi » Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:35 am

If there were worthy videos without effects, we'd probably had them in the finals.

I doubt it, because in my honest opinion it is hard to stand out without effects. There were some nice no-fx vids in the semis. Like Strange Has Been Found or Number 1.

Giving an award for not using effects is just like giving an award for coding in DivX instead of h264. It's sooo hard to get good quality with DivX!

Eh... yeah it is way harder to get a great popular video done without the use of effects. We should apprecite it! There are still concept that just don't need any effects at all.
this video shows that it does not need special effects to be interesting, compelling, or memorable. Entrants to this category will be limited to basic edits like cuts, simple transitions, simple text, and very subtle masking (such as lip flap removal).

That's how I see this category and I like it this way.

User avatar
Lirinis
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 5:24 pm
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Lirinis » Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:57 am

Nya-chan Production wrote:
Lirinis wrote:It's alright with tastes. The name and the definition are both misleading and incorrect.

this video shows that it does not need special effects to be interesting, compelling, or memorable. Entrants to this category will be limited to basic edits like cuts, simple transitions, simple text, and very subtle masking (such as lip flap removal).

This heavily contradicts the reality and should be at least updated.

Why should the people who do these videos pay for some jerks who can't categorize vids properly?

Because they are unpopular on a popularity contest? :-)

Do you think the vids that are currently in the finals are not properly categorized?
If you do, then what's the point of having a nomination which is systematically populated with wrong videos?
If you don't, then please pay attention that in fact they do have effects and this means you admit that the category definition is incorrect.

User avatar
Otohiko
Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 8:32 pm
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Otohiko » Thu Feb 04, 2010 12:08 pm

I agree that in fact not just this category, but several of the categories need to be better-defined. However the REAL problem here is that neither the editors nor the viewer-voters actually read the definitions, let alone agree with them. So maybe a better name for the category would be more appropriate, but then that's also tricky to categorize. Something like "best montage" or "best internal sync" or "best use of straight cuts" - they all sound dumb and, in some sense, I think the voters will either not get or not agree with what all those things are.

Any suggestions?
The Birds are using humanity in order to throw something terrifying at this green pig. And then what happens to us all later, that’s simply not important to them…

User avatar
Ileia
WHAT IS PINK MAY NEVER DIE!
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 12:29 am
Status: ....to completion
Location: On teh Z-drive, CornDog
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Ileia » Thu Feb 04, 2010 12:11 pm

I've seen some cons that have "Best Simple" or "Best Simplistic" or something to that effect.


Edit: ahaha, I see what I did there.
Last edited by Ileia on Thu Feb 04, 2010 12:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ngsilver
The Hookah Guy
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 1:22 pm
Status: Calm Your Miniature Colorful Horses
Location: Detroit area
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby ngsilver » Thu Feb 04, 2010 12:11 pm

But isn't the category basically culled based on who doesn't select 'effects' when they enter their video? I'm sure there is SOME quality check being done but in the end with the contest being switched to opt-out this year there were tons of videos in the category in the end that are there simply because the user failed to categorize their video properly. This is a problem with the way the contest is handled as a whole, since it relies heavily on how a user categorize their own videos. At least that is how I understand the process.

The fact that we have videos that have effects in the category and in the final round is a testament to both the current mindset of viewers (effect = good video) and how the VCA system works.
ImageImageImage
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Fall_Child42
has a rock
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 6:32 pm
Status: Veloci-tossin' to the max!
Location: Jurassic Park
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Fall_Child42 » Thu Feb 04, 2010 12:29 pm

Lirinis wrote:Isn't it time to remove this category? Any good video has some kind of effects nowadays.


Ladies and gentlemen, I now present to you the next George Lucas.
Image

User avatar
Koopiskeva
|:
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2002 7:31 pm
Status: O:
Location: Out There Occupation: Fondling Private Areas ..of the Nation.
Contact:
Org Profile

Re: Best No-Effects Video

Postby Koopiskeva » Thu Feb 04, 2010 1:04 pm

Lirinis wrote:Isn't it time to remove this category? Any good video has some kind of effects nowadays.


No. I really hope you're just joking because this is a foolish thing to say.
Hi.


Return to “2010 AnimeMusicVideos.org Viewers' Choice Awards”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests