AMV Meta-Review #44: AMV Critiques

JaddziaDax · Post by **JaddziaDax** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:00 pm

well then why dont they just change it to sync O:

CodeZTM · Post by **CodeZTM** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:04 pm

JaddziaDax wrote:well then why dont they just change it to sync O:

x2

Fall_Child42 · Post by **Fall_Child42** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:05 pm

CodeChrono wrote:
JaddziaDax wrote:well then why dont they just change it to sync O:
x2

Not every video has synch. :O

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:10 pm

Fall_Child42 wrote:
CodeChrono wrote:
JaddziaDax wrote:well then why dont they just change it to sync O:
x2
Not every video has synch. :O

And on that point, not every video even has... video

JaddziaDax · Post by **JaddziaDax** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:11 pm

actually they call it sync on the profile pages and on the opinion pages, they call it "action/editing" on the opinion form...

I'm just being emo about it though cause ive seen romance videos that don't need heavy action sequences get low ratings on action/editing

and if a video had no editing to it at all they would be uploading episodes O: its the slightest bit of editing when you add the audio to it.

CodeZTM · Post by **CodeZTM** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:13 pm

Otohiko wrote:
Fall_Child42 wrote:
CodeChrono wrote:
JaddziaDax wrote:well then why dont they just change it to sync O:
x2
Not every video has synch. :O
And on that point, not every video even has... video

JaddziaDax · Post by **JaddziaDax** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:15 pm

well if it doesn't have video.... how do you rank the video quality?

CodeZTM · Post by **CodeZTM** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:17 pm

JaddziaDax wrote:well if it doesn't have video.... how do you rank the video quality?

I suppose the high quailty of the photographs/images?

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:32 pm

In all fairness, I've been thinking about what to say about this thread for the whole day, but I can't manage to elaborate on it for some reason.

I think my main problem is that this isn't about the ratings, at all. I don't think they really mean anything in practical terms and only work in terms of comparison. And is comparison always the way to go in critique?

My own approach to critique and ratings alike is to try and deduce the video's goals and what it's trying to impress upon the audience. If a video has met what I perceive to be its goals, then it generally gets full marks from me. In practical terms this really varies as to what it really means.

What we really should be focusing on is not contrastive analysis, not comparison to other AMVs, not gold standards - but setting personal goals and helping people to come to practical terms with making the best AMV they want to make. If they want to do things to impress audiences - let's talk about ways they could do it better. If they want to do something for other reasons - let's talk about ways they could do that.

Hiding behind "personal AMVs" or "that wasn't what I was going for" is perhaps not really fair either, but I think a step towards meaningful AMV making and likewise meaningful AMV critique IS actually to recognize a disparity of individual goals in AMVing. How to interpret these is, however, a difficult question by itself and is probably subject to individual interpretation as well. So I guess the best anyone can try to do is always ask themselves "why".

shumira_chan · Post by **shumira_chan** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:34 pm

Well, too late as usual, but upon quadir's invite I thought I'd post.
When amv-review started out I shared a lot of the thoughts being
professed in this thread, although I could have been more
diplomatic in expressing them. Nowadays I believe that reviewing
AMVs is too personal a thing, and not that important.

I find that the bigger picture -- the fact that people have become
increasingly comfortable remixing culture without corporate guilt -- is
more significant, and in that sense your typical utube DBZ/Linkin
Park AMV is just as meaningful as any ORG masterpiece.