EEVBlog Video Length

[Hugoneus]

This has always been a challenge for channels like mine. Especially because my videos are generally focused on more advanced topics. But because my content is focused this way, people don’t mind long videos. I don’t think anyone has ever told me my videos were too long even though they are often 1 hour long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wolfgang]

Hi Shariar,

IMHO you are doing a better video job than Dave, because:

- no gossip. No fast forward needed.
- only relevant info, not matters of individual taste or fashion
- interesting insights into complicated matters. The level is advanced, but adequate for EEs. Nothing wrong with that.
- Your videos are long. Yes. But you never feel bored because its really packed with good info.

I like it !

Best regards
  Wolfgang

[rsjsouza]

I also don't like series, as there is a continuous "commitment" in order to get it all. When I sit down to watch something of an evening I want full closure within the two hours, so movie it is.

I usually release a "series" when I have all (or most) material already shot and it becomes a matter of editing and staggered publishing. In the past I did a series about a repair and almost crashed and burned when my schedule increased by a lot and I couldn't find time to shoot the additional parts. I couldn't also shoot other smaller things that interested me, given that all my space was taken by the repair project.

I read the initial posts of the OP and find the points well put - however, I see that over the years Dave have improved a lot regarding redundancy and waffling, which reduces the fat of his videos and increases the proportion of actual information conveyed (and opinions as well). IMHO, having more information is always more desirable as you can always skip to whatever interests you. Several heavily edited and wonderfully produced videos leave a lot to be desired to me.

Also, a long video may have a lot of information already mentioned in previous videos, which caters well to new audiences unfamiliar with the channel. However, it can be seen as boring by the regulars. Conversely, a short video can be quite dense and unpalatable to a new guy.

[EEVblog]

I don't mind long videos as long as there is good information in it.
What I only see very often (including Dave's videos) is that things repeated many times or a lot of time is spend on things that aren't important to the video.

Aren't important in your opinion.
Something being "important" in a video is a not a matter of simple demonstrable fact, i.e. it's true or it's not, it doesn't work like that.

But I don't understand what's wrong about improving yourself?

Again, making videos shorter (and hence an "improvement") by cutting out content is again not a simple demonstrable true or false thing.
Some people will agree it's an improvement, but others will think it makes the content worse.

This isn't like improving the quality of your audio or video, or removing umms and ahhs where everyone will agree it's an improvement.
And that's why some people like Pete seems to get so upset about this, they think it's an obvious improvement when the reality is more complex than that.

[EEVblog]

Hi Shariar,
IMHO you are doing a better video job than Dave, because:
- no gossip. No fast forward needed.

What does "gossip" even mean?

[EEVblog]

Also, a long video may have a lot of information already mentioned in previous videos, which caters well to new audiences unfamiliar with the channel. However, it can be seen as boring by the regulars. Conversely, a short video can be quite dense and unpalatable to a new guy.

That's the thing, I have to try and strike a balance here. You'll often hear me say "I covered that in another video I'll link in here". But if it's short to explain the basic then I'll re-tell it then and there.
e.g. if I'm troubleshooting an opamp I'm not going to explain how opamps work. But if I'm doing at teardown and I see some solder thieving pads then it would take me just the same amount of time to point people to another video as it would to simply explain it's so the solder wave doesn't get trapped and create a short as the board goes through the machine.

[Wolfgang]

... information irrelevant for the subject. I'm German, and I probably borrowed a British English term, sorry.

[b_force]

I don't mind long videos as long as there is good information in it.
What I only see very often (including Dave's videos) is that things repeated many times or a lot of time is spend on things that aren't important to the video.

Aren't important in your opinion.
Something being "important" in a video is a not a matter of simple demonstrable fact, i.e. it's true or it's not, it doesn't work like that.

But I don't understand what's wrong about improving yourself?

Again, making videos shorter (and hence an "improvement") by cutting out content is again not a simple demonstrable true or false thing.
Some people will agree it's an improvement, but others will think it makes the content worse.

This isn't like improving the quality of your audio or video, or removing umms and ahhs where everyone will agree it's an improvement.
And that's why some people like Pete seems to get so upset about this, they think it's an obvious improvement when the reality is more complex than that.

People giving feedback and listen to what they have to say (because some of them here actually have experience in giving lectures/workshops or running YouTube channels) is also a form of improving.

Btw, besides that some things are factual unimportant (like talking about sea turtles in a scope review) there is also something more about how to give a proper and smooth talk so your audience won't get bored after 5-10 minutes.
So the "factual" discussion is a bit of a non-argument to be very honest.
Than you're missing the point and nit picking words.
There are tons of well written and interesting literature about this subject.
Sidetracking to much (so non relevant information) is one of the biggest pitfalls.

Unfortunately I have to say that most of the well meant feedback given in this topic by multiple people doesn't seem to be taken serious.
Maybe it's just how it reads for me personally, maybe it's a cultural thing? 

[rx8pilot]

I like longer technical videos in general. I like details, which takes time to present. I don't want the content creators to be burdened with the planning, scripting, and editing that is required to abridge a complex topic.

[Mr. Scram]

This has always been a challenge for channels like mine. Especially because my videos are generally focused on more advanced topics. But because my content is focused this way, people don’t mind long videos. I don’t think anyone has ever told me my videos were too long even though they are often 1 hour long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think I've told you this before, but despite their length your videos are never tedious. It's all about pace and information density. Besides, there are too many "quick and easy" videos around. I cherish the channels who take their time.

Some people make much shorter videos that make me tear my hair out due to their endless repetition, gratingly slow pace or low information density.

[EEVblog]

... information irrelevant for the subject.

Ok, please provide specific examples.
I'm sure there are BTW, I often go off on tangents, but that's because I think they are important.
Sorry if you don't like that, it's just my style and I think it's valuable, so I'm not going to stop doing it. I already think I strike a good balance here.

[wilfred]

This has always been a challenge for channels like mine. Especially because my videos are generally focused on more advanced topics. But because my content is focused this way, people don’t mind long videos. I don’t think anyone has ever told me my videos were too long even though they are often 1 hour long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You've clearly got a plan that you follow and people know what to expect before they have made the decision to watch a long video. Your audience trusts you to make good use of the time. As long as you preserve that trust you will not receive complaints. There is no single ideal time for a video, the complaints aren't really about the actual time.

[EEVblog]

People giving feedback and listen to what they have to say (because some of them here actually have experience in giving lectures/workshops or running YouTube channels) is also a form of improving.

And that's precisely what I'm doing, listening.

Sidetracking to much (so non relevant information) is one of the biggest pitfalls.

Also, it's one of the things I get the most compliments about. Those little tangents I go off on during videos, many people see then as valuable nuggets of information.

Unfortunately I have to say that most of the well meant feedback given in this topic by multiple people doesn't seem to be taken serious.

So me spending hours in this thread listening to and replying to people shows I'm not taking it seriously? Really? Perhaps I should just stop?

[EEVblog]

You've clearly got a plan that you follow and people know what to expect before they have made the decision to watch a long video. Your audience trusts you to make good use of the time. As long as you preserve that trust you will not receive complaints.

LOL, it's Youtube, people will always complain about something.

There is no single ideal time for a video, the complaints aren't really about the actual time.

No, the "complaints" are essentially about people not getting exactly what they want. This is inevitable.

[Wolfgang]

Dave,

In would say we agree to disagree. Its pointless to provide examples of waffling, because you like it anyway and you feel it belongs in your videos.
Fine with me, its *your* channel, *your* work and *your* content.
There is enough other valuable info on your site, so I will continue using it as long I can learn something.

Thanks
  Wolfgang

[wilfred]

Unfortunately I have to say that most of the well meant feedback given in this topic by multiple people doesn't seem to be taken serious.
Maybe it's just how it reads for me personally, maybe it's a cultural thing? 

I don't think it is a cultural thing. I think it is because it is actually deeper than just measuring the video length with a stop watch. As long as the deeper issues go unresolved the problem remains.

Take the channel that produces low light blurry handheld videos, you could complain or just choose not to watch or you would watch without complaint. But which option would you choose? And why? I think it would depend on your expectation and whether you felt cheated and had your time wasted by someone who normally would do better but decided their time was more important than yours.

If you wanted to help them you might take the time to suggest what your expectations are and what they could do to meet them. Either they work harder to meet them or you lower your expectations. Or you go elsewhere.

If you'd paid for the service based on a preexisting belief of the standard you should expect you would not hesitiate to complain if it failed to maintain that standard. If you are only investing your time then you have to be prepared to withdraw it. Fortunately on YT that is very easy to do.

[EEVblog]

In would say we agree to disagree. Its pointless to provide examples of waffling, because you like it anyway and you feel it belongs in your videos.

No, deliberate intentional and valuable technical tangents are one thing, waffle and non-value adding side talk is another thing.
Please provide an example of what you think is particularly non-valuable side waffle and I'll look at it and tell you if I agree.
I do not want non-valuable waffle in my videos any more than you do.
Seriously, I want to know so I can improve my content. Simply saying I waffle on too much etc does not help me, only specific example can help me understand were the line is.
That goes for others too, please provide specific examples with time stamps. This is a two way street, I cannot improve if I'm just given vague complaints.

And please, make it fairly recent video example because I have been tightening up my edits in recent times. I admit that I used to do this a lot and didn't bother to edit out stuff. Now I spend more time editing and am conscious of getting the time down and taking out non-valuable information.

[joeqsmith]

I don't mind long videos as long as there is good information in it.
What I only see very often (including Dave's videos) is that things repeated many times or a lot of time is spend on things that aren't important to the video.
That just makes the video unnecessarily long and I personally find that frustrating to hear somebody saying what he already did 3-4 times before.
Even harder to keep focused if the story goes all over the place.

Practically I do think more than 20-25 minutes is stretching it for a YouTube video, unless it's a good documentary/classroom style video.

Yeah, sure you can say let people do the things as they want.
But I don't understand what's wrong about improving yourself?
Guess some people just still like living in caves.

I've make a channel out of rinse and repeat.   It's boring to watch but there's nothing glamorous or exciting about testing. 

[Wolfgang]

Hi Dave,

Challenge accepted.
I will look at a video not more than 6 months (is that OK ?) old and write a detailled critique about it. I must confess that I did not look at the recent ones so much, you know why.
It will take a while, however. Still, dont feel obliged to change anything just because of me.

Regards
  Wolfgang

[EEVblog]

Challenge accepted.
I will look at a video not more than 6 months (is that OK ?) old and write a detailled critique about it. I must confess that I did not look at the recent ones so much, you know why.
It will take a while, however. Still, dont feel obliged to change anything just because of me.

Thanks, 6 months is probably ok.
No need for detailed critique (e.g. I think you should have explained this circuit this way etc), just some timestamps to something I said and the reason you think that didn't need to be in there.
Same for anyone else, please provide examples, I will watch and take them seriously.
And please, no "you could have said that in fewer words" etc, that's not what we are talking about here. It's about information that is redundant to the video and could have been edited out.

Take #1116 for example (How to Remove Power Supply Ripple)
That one is much longer than I thought it would be. But during editing I don't recall finding anything I didn't think was valuable to include.
That being said, I haven't actually watched it after I edited it.

[Muttley Snickers]

Since everybody suddenly feels the need to spill their guts, one of the better archery channels I subscribe to has recently decided to do more live streams which I don't or won't watch for anybody or anything regardless of the content. I fully appreciate that these provides a great medium and opportunity for creators to engage with their audience but I always get the impression that the creators feel compelled to string these out for a hour or two, sorry but generally speaking most of it is waffle and not my cup of tea. 

[G0HZU]

Hi Shariar,
IMHO you are doing a better video job than Dave, because:
- no gossip. No fast forward needed.

What does "gossip" even mean?

FWIW I'm mainly interested in teardowns and reviews of high end RF test gear and I appreciate the time taken (by both Shahriar and Dave) to make these videos. However, I slightly prefer Dave's teardowns because his closeup camerawork is better and he gets closer to component level analysis with the commentary and the camerawork. Often, he takes time to read out the part numbers on the components and even uploads the datasheet and also provides links to high res still images that can be studied in detail. It must take a lot of effort to do this and I really appreciate it because I can then study the design in more detail at my own pace. I rarely watch any of these teardowns in a linear fashion and I'm often guilty of initially skimming them to the best bits where the gear is actually being taken apart with plenty of closeup RF camerawork. Ideally, I want to see inside the gear as if I was taking it apart myself and Dave's teardowns and still images get me the closest.

One obvious difference is that Shahriars videos tend to be teardown/repair videos and the focus is often on the symptoms and the fault diagnosis and subsequent faultfinding and repair and test. But Dave's teardowns are purely about what is in the box and what looks good/bad from a design point of view. So I think this is why I slightly prefer Dave's teardowns because they suit my needs better. But that is just my opinion and I don't expect everyone to agree with me  

I guess what I'm saying above is that I think it would be harder for me to edit/shorten Dave's teardowns because there is generally more interesting stuff going on that is relevant to me.

[mickmake]

Hi Shariar,
IMHO you are doing a better video job than Dave, because:
- no gossip. No fast forward needed.

What does "gossip" even mean?

Mate, your channel is full of goss! What are you on about?

[james_s]

He can make his videos any length he wants. Sometimes I do end up thinking "ok cool now get on with it!" and then I realize there's a transport bar so I can skip ahead to the next interesting bit.

[Fungus]

He can make his videos any length he wants. Sometimes I do end up thinking "ok cool now get on with it!" and then I realize there's a transport bar so I can skip ahead to the next interesting bit.

Yep.

The same goes for people saying, "I'd personally rather see a complicated topic broken down into 2-3 shorter videos that follow in logical sequence vs one long one."

Isn't that what the "pause" button is for?