I don't like that. I did masks for a year using VirtualDub and PhotoImpression because I was editing with a single-track program. Sure, it's effort. Cutting out characters and inserting them in new scenes is just effort. I did both the same way, and both tedious tricks that required "just effort." In both scenarios, you're just moving footage around. But I consider cutting out characters an 'effect' because it isn't there in the original anime and you generally can't do it without the use of a program outside the editing program. For single-track programs, masking (overlays) is the same effort as the cut-and-paste effects. You're just pasting entire scenes instead of parts of scenes.Bakadeshi wrote:I also think masks are more effort than an effect. I consider an effect creating an image or altering the visual of an image using software or other means an effect, whereas masking could be the same category as cutting out a scene and putting it in the timeline. Your basically just moving around footage when it comes to masking.
But, really, if we're basing effects on whether or not it's more than "just effort", then there are no such things as effects. Clicking a button to add a flare on a scene requires next to no effort - does that mean it's more of an effect than something that requires days to pull off? In that case, is a video like "The Race" qualified for "no effects" because it required so much more effort than a lens flare? Or are we saying effects are things that require more than "just effort" and that clicking "lens flare" takes more "thought/creativity/things-other-than-just-effort" than cutting and pasting a character?
Either way, it doesn't work. You can't determine effect vs no effect based on whether or not the editing trick requires "just effort" vs something-other-than-just-effort. I've seen too many cut-and-fade videos that required a lot more than just effort, and I still wouldn't consider them effect videos.
/the "is it noticeable" vs "is it there" debate
Last year we had "Whisper of the Beast" nominated for the Best No-Effects video. The entire point of that video was the effects, but the creator chose not to check the box. Since it wasn't available to be picked for Best Effects, the fans decided to push it for "No-Effects". Some people tried to argue that the excessive effects were so smooth they didn't notice them. Others raised eyebrows at how stupid a person would have to be not to notice the effects in such an obvious effects-based video. The fact remains that if a viewer can't see the effects, they don't exist. It's like judging effort - if the viewer can't tell a lot of effort was put in, it's taken as an effortless video. In judging vids, it's all in how the video is seen by the people doing the judging.
In terms of the VCA, it doesn't matter if the video has effects or not. It's all about that box - if it's not clicked, it's applicable to the no effects category. It's not a debate, it's not about how you see it or how it compares to other videos. It's just about that box. If anyone's opinion matters, it's the creator who chose not to check that box.
I would have been fixed with no score in effects but the people in charge of deleting reviews refused to delete the guys review that I told not to put in an effect score.. and that I accidently forgot to uncheck that area.. Now I'm stuck with a biased score.. and now feel I am now forced to make a video with effects.. sorry I can't help it I'm a bit OCD... Damn you mods/admns! 