If AMV's are so unoriginal, then why...

[pen-pen2002]

If AMV's are so unoriginal, then why are they so easily identified?

People love to gripe, and in the AMV world one of the more popular ones concernes the "Lack of originality" in AMVs. Many people are fond of saying that it's all been done before and no one makes any original videos anymore (or never did in the first place.)

It just occored to me that if this is true why do those "Help me find a video" threads almost always work (besides the fact we have too much free time)?

I've seen videos identified via descriptions as vauge as "Goku was fighting Vegita and the music had a bunch of rock guitars, and that's all I can remember. BUT IT WAS AWESOME!"

What do you guys think, do AMVs in general get originality points for being extremely memorable, or is that just the function of the medeum (I.E. things are easy to remember if you have both visual and auditory cues.)

[genestarwind21122]

I don't give originality points for enjoyability of an amv. I give it for the combination of anime and music. Plus including the story sometimes. However if it is an overused song and anime I will give originality if the video is very well done. Above and beyond all the other videos I've seen. Plus if it is an overused combination and it tells the story in a different view though or through a unique style of editing then I give it points for that.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Are these groups of people (th eones that complain and th eones that identify) one in the same? If not, well, there you go then. If so, provide evidence. The discussion can go on from there.

[Arigatomina]

Even with an overused song and an overused anime (and an overused combination of the two), you can still have videos easily identified by the title or the character focus. There may be a dozen dbz vids to the same songs, but chances are there's only one of them that focuses on Piccolo (ex) so any search for the song, anime, and *character* is easy. The vid will still be dubbed unoriginal by the naysayers, despite being one-of-a-kind. The reason is because the naysayers haven't watched the other videos they're comparing the vid to. They call them all the same because they glance at the combination and walk away, nose to the sky. Those who actually watch them can tell the differences pretty easily. Even if you take two lbz vegeta vids, you can identify a search by the scenes used in the vids - no two editors will pick the exact same scenes.

Then there's the happy little idea that most of the vids people look for are the better ones to that combination, in which case they're the only vids for that combo people remember. If someone comes by looking for a Vegeta vid to "In the End", it's probably Dark Kamui's vid because his is the one that people like the most. It's like glancing through a photo album of classmates - you remember the ones you liked or hated, not the ones you just saw every day without caring. In that case, originality doesn't make any difference as long as someone who liked the video happens past the thread.

I know when this comes up in threads a lot of forum-posters say originality is one of the most important aspects to whether or not they like videos, but I don't believe that's true for the majority of amv-watchers. The originality scores given prove this. If originality were that important, and that difficult to come by, thousands of viewers wouldn't be handing out 8s and above to every video they enjoy watching.

Maybe it's an editor/non-editor thing. Elitist, colored glasses, whatever you want to call it. You remember things you attach an emotion to, original by whoever's standards or not.

[Knowname]

If AMV's are so unoriginal, then why are they so easily identified?

People love to gripe, and in the AMV world one of the more popular ones concernes the "Lack of originality" in AMVs. Many people are fond of saying that it's all been done before and no one makes any original videos anymore (or never did in the first place.)

It just occored to me that if this is true why do those "Help me find a video" threads almost always work (besides the fact we have too much free time)?

I've seen videos identified via descriptions as vauge as "Goku was fighting Vegita and the music had a bunch of rock guitars, and that's all I can remember. BUT IT WAS AWESOME!"

What do you guys think, do AMVs in general get originality points for being extremely memorable, or is that just the function of the medeum (I.E. things are easy to remember if you have both visual and auditory cues.)

I'm telling you, ppl don't know what original is. Here let me drum up my essay on the subject

Originality has NOTHING to do with how many times it has been DONE! The common misconception about originality around the org is SO back-half-asswards. Originality is JUST how WELL it is done! Sure, many times that means it has only been done once, because, after all, if something is 1000% done all ready why try to improve it when all you can do is do it over the same if not worse?? Anyway THAT'S why only 1 is usually considered original, not because it is unique. If somebody did do that again to the same (or incrementally better... maybe due to a new effect or something) quality is the original product distinction then transfered, and how could you ever HOPE to keep track of that! You'd have to keep even unreleased products in mind, it's IMPOSSIBLE!
If your still confused let me point this one out- in sports ppl of this opinion would think hitting the grand slam or haveing the acrobatic dunk as original, just passing the ball or moving the runner into scoreing position, anybody can do that, it CAN'T be original. However, if you pay attention to opinionated ppl they'd always say to things that are 'easy ways out' or 'slight of hand', my that's original or something like that... In case you didn't know that's a sarcastic remark saying just the opposite. Why? because it's the easy way out, no work is necessary, in the long run it'll get you nowhere. That's not original though one person hit that grand slam, one person took that dunk (maybe Tim Duncan can't dunk like Allen Iverson) the originality should be credited, in fact, to the guys who moved the runners to load the bases, the ppl that cleared the defense to set up the dunk! I mean, due to them, their's little else that person may be able to do, that's why he's there, he's EXPECTED to do that, what's original about that if he's done it before??
Bottom line, and what this has to do with AMVs, originality has NOTHING to do with 'I dun it FIRST!!' it has everything to do with functionality, if it successfully tells a story from EVERY aspect (whether you've seen the anime or just picked up the vid off the street). BTW I've only seen two non-fun videos that's original and that's mine (Knowname's Akira: Castle on a Cloud) and an old Macross one (OtakuOutpost's One more day, both to the Les Mis soundtrack). The Macross one has only subtley to do with the anime, mine has NOTHING to do with it, I'm very proud of this (that was my goal) ;p.

I copied it down as I repeat it alot. Short story, frequency indirectly relates to originality. Originality does not relate to frequency.

that, in a nutshell, is how I judge originality.

In short: yes, exactly, if it's 1000% done it's memorable.

[JaddziaDax]

hmmmn usually when a combination of it was a dragon ball z video with a rock song somes up... its easier to narrow it down by asking "do you remember the lyrics to the song?" and helping them narrow down their search that way...

plus sometimes its funny when people point out what i consider unoriginal stuff and say how original it is to them....

O.o maybe they havent seen as many amvs as I have... when it comes to the masses I'm sure that there are alot of people who are new to AMVs, as reading posts such as "i just saw my first AMV today! I love this place" in journals would deffinately be proof of that.

the reason people remember certain things that others dont, is because they either 1 like it or 2 did something different that the other 100s of those videos didnt do... even if its just a simple timing thing.

[Corran]

These days I still find new Eva videos that I love even though I've seen so many of them. More than source selection goes into making a video. The rest, scene selection, concept/story, editing techniques, etc is what I go off of for originality.

Some people have different definitions though. I made a dramatic character profile for a minor character of Love Hina. Most videos to the series focus on Naru and Keitaro and are upbeat comedies. Despite that, in a decent percent of OPs I received, people docked me some points on originality simply because Love Hina was used in the video. One person even went as far as giving me a 1 in originality, 3 in review, and a 2 in overall because of this.

# Good Good for a Love Hina AMV but...
# Bad Very very unoriginal for the 100,000th time. It is much better to choose anime that is hardly known. Not only does it make good anime(OFten times much better than the widely known) that are not known possibly sell better, it would also give more variety. In any case, stuff like Ayatsuri Sakon, Kita He, Piano, Kimi Ga Nozomu Eien, True Love Story, First Kiss Story, Good Morning Call, etc. would be much better. Not to mention Love Hina is as romantic as getting your head blown off by a magnum.
# General

I'm pretty sure none of those animes were even out when I made that video.

[Otohiko]

I have a gripe with the idea of originality in general. There's a marked difference between artistic ability and the so-called originality.

If you think about it, all that originality in the sense of "never-done-before!" accomplishes is reverse-imitation. That by itself is not enough. The fact is that the video - originally-sourced or original-combination or not - should have some sort of artistic merit.

Frankly, and this might seem strange coming from me, but I could care less for the combinations a video uses - as long as it blows my socks off all the same.

[requiett]

Originality = "Am I sick of this yet?"

[Orwell]

Love Hina is as romantic as getting your head blown off by a magnum.

His problem is quite clear. He isn't looking at the larger picture. The hairs a symbol of a sprouting relationship. White speckles, the first moment I saw you. Grey matter - the beginning of a new chapter in life. Flesh tones hailing the light you bring, and the climatic spray of red across the background, a declarant of passion to the world of your love.

Needs work but its a start. As far as originality goes, I agree with Oto and Requiett. One could argue for one side or the other to the extremes, and all it would boil down to is the subjective opinion based on the person. The interpretation of originality is original itself. Or something.