How to EEVblog - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 04:00:50 pm
content: hi, i wonder how Dave and other electronics bloggers are shooting their videos. Like where to set up the camera, which settings should you do and what type of mic is good for that task. Also i would be interested in which situations you look on the camera screen, or if you should have an external screen.If anyone knows anything how to make such high quality videos, i would be very thankful for any information

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 06:20:22 pm
content: Lots of Dave's videos show the process, just watch all of them

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 06:32:24 pm
content: do you have a link to the video(s) where he describes how to set up the camera and/or the microphone, that would be great!

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 06:38:02 pm
content: There is not a direct video about that, but a lot of videos have process leaked.As far as I know in most cases for the desktop shots he just sits behind the camera and looks though a screen of the camera. Some sort of external wireless mic is used. I think there is somewhere a teardown video of one of those wireless transmitters. EDIT: here it isYou will figure most of it out as you go, it is not a rocket science. The hardest part is having things to talk about.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 06:45:37 pm
content: Some key things I recall Dave talking about are:1. Camera -- use a dedicated video camera, not a still camera in video mode2. Microphone -- use an external mic; use a clip-on mic for good voice capture3. Lighting -- bright, diffused lighting to avoid dark areas and shadows

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 07:04:09 pm
content: thanks to you both! i think i have to try it, but i can not imagine to work on something looking through such a tiny screen. also i dont have an idea where to position the camera and how to mount it...

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 07:07:15 pm
content: Quote from: Mafex on November 10, 2016, 07:04:09 pmWell, yes, that's the challenge. Making good quality videos is hard work.Quote from: Mafex on November 10, 2016, 07:04:09 pmJust a standard tripod and position it in a way that the things you need to show are in the shot.

author: vk3yedotcom
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 07:36:22 pm
content: Unless you're showing something sound is more important than the very finest detail in the picture.IanB's tips are good - your camera must have an external microphone input.Wireless microphones are handy for ease of movement but you need to pay a lot of money for a good one.If you don't wish to then a cheap electret on a long cable works as well as a wireless mic costing many times more.If your camera doesn't supply power to the electret mic then you'll need to build a small power unit as described below.This video was done before I got the above external microphone but the hints and tips below could be usefulUnless you're good off the cuff you will need some short of plan or order of what to say. But preferably done without reading off a script as that's boring. Good editing can hide a multitude of sins.Dave seems to have the gift of talking without much editing but for those who don't then editing is super-important. You may have to shoot 60 min of footage for a video that edits down to 5 min. And editing can take 2 - 3 hours for a video of that length. Yes it takes you time but imagine the time your viewers save! Say that good editing allows you to cut an 18 min video to 6 min, saving 12 min. Multiply by 1000 views and you've saved viewers 200 hours. 10 000 views (possible if you become prominent) then it's 2000 hours saving. Your viewers will thank you for this.It could be worth having a distinctive style so that your videos are easily recognisable. Maybe you do your video with a particular pet (though don't let it take over your topic). Or a particular backdrop. I like a lot of natural scenery. That could work for you if you're near a river, forest or beach AND your projects interface with the natural world. Of course you have to be careful with direct sunlight (shadows), excessive light (makes you squint), or wind noise but it's better than just a single workshop shot. Even several different angles breaks up the scenes and can be good.

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 08:11:16 pm
content: what about not recording the sound directly to the video, i own a pretty good sound recorder and a nice mic. so i could just clap in the viewing range of the camera, to line up the sound of the clap to the movement of the clap later on..thanks for your video and your tips, maybe that helps a loti think i will have to try it with just a few notes like i do in lectures

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 08:20:02 pm
content: No shaky camera, background music or stupid intro please.

author: jancumps
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 08:25:46 pm
content: Modern cameras record microphone sound good enough. No point going trough the hassle of separating sound&video on different media.

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 08:48:03 pm
content: any tips which cameras are good for that purpose? and maybe not too expensive

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 10:23:14 pm
content: Quote from: Mafex on November 10, 2016, 08:48:03 pmDoes not matter/whatever you can afford. I recently went back and watched Mike's (mikeselectricstuff) videos from 2011 again, they are filmed on something really cheap and sometimes with dead pixels. They are still totally enjoyable, not because of awesome video quality, but because of awesome video content.

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 10:37:27 pm
content: Quote from: ataradov on November 10, 2016, 10:23:14 pmYeah right, Mikes content was great even when he started, just like Daves. But my demand for myself in terms of video quality is that it looks at least reasonably well.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 10:50:12 pm
content: BigClive shoots on an iPad with the built in microphone and both video and audio quality are fine.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 11:02:08 pm
content: Quote from: IanB on November 10, 2016, 06:45:37 pmCorrect. Canon HFG30 mostly + Sony NEX VG30 for mailbag talking head.QuoteI only use wireless external mic for whiteboard stuff because the camera is way back to get deep depth of field.Otherwise it's internal mic on both cameras. They are more than good enough if you are close to them. Mailbag I'm about 1.5m away form the internal shotgun, but that's good enough. Wireless mics are too much mucking around for day to day shoots.QuoteMy lighting is very non-optimal. Just some overhead LED lights. The camera shadows stuff which is bad, so I have to get around to moving these panels.I shoot manual depth of field for teardowns etc, and often manual exposure for bright/dark combo scenesNo external screen, I just uise the 3" internal screen. Sometimes I miss stuff because of that as I'm almost always watching the scree to make sure the shot is correct.

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 11:02:41 pm
content: Quote from: IanB on November 10, 2016, 10:50:12 pmreally? just with an iPad? i often watch his videos and the quality is really okay and i have an iPad Air 2 laying arround, it just needs a little screen repair and im ready to go

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 11:03:47 pm
content: QuoteOnly a fool would record video separately from video and sync it up later. Great for a hollywood movie, useless for anything else. When you make videos regularly then anything that reduces your editing time will keep you from going insane.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 11:05:08 pm
content: Quote from: Mafex on November 10, 2016, 08:48:03 pmDoesn't matter much, it's all about how much light you have. If you have enough light then even a phone camera works great.By enough light I mean shooting outside, or having massive studio lights. Indoor light isneverenough, even for a professional camera.

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 11:10:44 pm
content: thanks dave for that answers, these cameras are a bit pricy to start with for me, i will test it with my iPad and my good old gopro hero3, also i have a sony alpha 77II here, so i can test that one too, i tested it a few times outside and the results were pretty well.. i think i have to try it out and than choose the best one for recording

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2016, 11:13:09 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 10, 2016, 11:03:47 pmyeah, probably youre right.

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 12:23:52 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on November 11, 2016, 12:06:34 amit will take some time, till you will see my video. before i will shoot and upload a video, i want to learn about cutting and a bit editing.. when i think i am good enough in that, i will choose a topic and than film it. probably nothing fancy, as you said, you have to get started..

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 02:46:51 am
content: Quote from: vk3yedotcom on November 10, 2016, 07:36:22 pmA typical video for me is maybe 50-100 clips.I prefer to think of something to say and then record a clip of that. It just breaks up the flow and gives your subconscious time to think about what's next.I usually know kinda what I want to talk about when I hit record, but I usually have no idea exactly what to say when I hit record, I just wing it. So maybe 10% of the time there will be a false start because I what came out didn't make sense. You can see see that on my timeline below, with a small pause on clip 42 for example.Other golden rule is I shoot everything in sequence, even if I have to change my macro lens 10 times. Makes editing infinitely easier. You'll go nuts otherwise. So I just drag all my clips into the timeline, trim the smart and the end, and delete the occasional dumb clip and that's it.Very little of my footage is wasted or edited out, almost all of it makes it in the final edit.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 02:48:31 am
content: Quote from: Mafex on November 10, 2016, 11:13:09 pmI guarantee you I'm right!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 02:54:54 am
content: Quote from: vk3yedotcom on November 10, 2016, 07:36:22 pmYes, sound is more important than video. People will watch crap video quality with great sound, but not the other way around.QuoteYes, cheap ones suck, really, they do. $500+ for a decent set.I used this for a few years:http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/9c6eca17168eef6f/index.htmlIt had a 5m cord and worked well.But if you are always just behind camera and within 1m of the mic, then the internal one will work fine on adecentcamera.And old article on my setuphttps://usesthis.com/interviews/dave.jones/

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 06:29:36 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 11, 2016, 02:48:31 amWhat Dave said!!Syncing up a separate audio track is just nuts - especially if you have multiple clips. Aside from spending a lot of time, you'll go insane before you get half way and be ready to shoot someone (and I don't mean with a camera) before you're finished.As with ANY photographic exercise - be it still photography or video -aim to do as little post-production work as possible.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 07:44:40 am
content: If, however, you want to try syncing up an audio track - you'll soon understand why they use these things......

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 07:45:35 am
content: Quote from: Brumby on November 11, 2016, 06:29:36 amMultiple that by 1000+ videos.QuoteYep, the only thing I really do in editing is trim the clip start/end, maybe the odd clip volume here and there (just eyeballing based on waveform level. See my screen shot, it's why I have the audio waveform view big), add the odd overlay text or image, and occasionally a tweak or two like a fancy zoom or scroll.White balance, framing, audio etc etc is done in-camera.With the audio view I don't even have to listen to the audio, as I can usually remember what I said, and if I see a clip like this I know to simply trim out the first two bits with the pauses because I know they were gibberish. And I never watch the entire video when it's done, I simply trust myself that I've edited it correctly step-by-step (I avoid missing steps and "go back to it later"). Very occasionally an editing error will slip through using this process but it's the reason I'm still doing this after 7 1/2 years and 1000+ videos.

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 02:08:25 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 11, 2016, 02:46:51 amSo you shoot short clips and put them together? till now i thought you would shoot it in a very few clips (like only one per camera) and cut that in smaller clips later. this tip with many short clips and everything in sequence is a extremely useful tip in my opinion and by comparing both techniques (many short clips/few long clips) in mind, the short clips are by far the better opinion! thanks for that!and another question to you, dave: is it okay for you, when i mention videos from you in my clips, with link on screen or in description of course?

author: imidis
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 08:48:01 pm
content: Quote from: Bud on November 10, 2016, 08:20:02 pmAgree with this. I was browsing some videos and there was a fancy intro with music which then went to a shaky cell phone screen, bad lighting along with horrible audio. I was thinking they may have put their effort in the wrong place.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 08:56:35 pm
content: Quote from: wilfred on November 10, 2016, 10:54:48 pmThe internal microphone works because it is probably less than 12 inches from his mouth in his normal configuration and he has a strong voice.He certainly uses additional lighting and quite often you can see him changing or adjusting and/or commenting on the lighting in the video.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 11, 2016, 10:45:40 pm
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on November 11, 2016, 08:56:35 pmFor camera phone/tablet etc to give decent quality video indoors like this you'd need 500W-1000W of direct studio lighting.Normal indoor lighting, regardless of how much you have, is "low light", and even my proper $$$$ cameras are limited in this level of lighting.Even with my studio ceiling LED lights all on and 1000lux on the bench, it's still not enough to get noise free images with a large depth of field (that you need for teardowns etc) with a camera that has a DSLR APS-C sized sensor.Thsoe that do boast about how wonderful their DSLR is a ta shooting videos indoor are using shallow depth of field.

author: ez24
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2016, 02:56:26 am
content: Quote from: Mafex on November 10, 2016, 08:11:16 pmI did this once and it worked well. I used a dog clicker for endings (cuts) and I could see the audio peaks from the clicker in the editor. I just held it off camera, so when I wanted to stop I would click then turn off the video.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 12, 2016, 03:03:45 am
content: Quote from: Mafex on November 11, 2016, 02:08:25 pmYes, rarely does a video have less than say 50 clips.QuoteI think short clips leads to less waffe. I could shoot a single take video if I really wanted (and I used to do this right at the start), but I like being able to give my mind a few 10's of seconds pause to decide what to talk about next.QuoteSure.

author: amirm
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2016, 05:34:33 am
content: Quote from: Mafex on November 10, 2016, 08:11:16 pmHopefully you have been dissuaded of this idea already. But just in case, if the clock between the audio recorder and video are not sync'ed (which won't be in the scenario you describe) they would start to drift from each other and you quickly lose lip sync. Software can resample the audio to stretch or compress it but then you have to spend time doing that processing. Best to use the audio in the camcorder if at all possible.

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2016, 03:59:04 pm
content: Quote from: amirm on November 12, 2016, 05:34:33 amyeah, this idea is crap for my purpose, but i dont think the clock drift would be big enough to bring the footages out of sync noticably..

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2016, 04:13:33 pm
content: Quote from: Mafex on November 10, 2016, 08:11:16 pmYes, if you were doing a feature film with a separate sound crew and a big budget to cover an editor's assistant to sync all the audio tracks with the video clips.Otherwise, for something like "video blogging" on YouTube, there is ZERO benefit and MASSIVE downside to recording "double-system" (separate picture and sound). You can find video cameras with proper microphone inputs at very sensible prices. And even cheap cameras will produce remarkably good pictures if you give them GOOD lighting. NOT just average/typical light you find in a room.Over on a couple of audio and production-related forums I also frequent (CreativeCOW, GearSlutz, DVinfo, DVXuser, etc.) we have rank amateurs coming through with the notion that they have to spend $3K on a large-diaphragm condenser mic with a big articulated arm and a silly pop filter, followed by 4-5 rack units full of audio processing gear, none of which they actually need, much less even understand what they do. And trying to get studio quality sound in their untreated garage with major highway noise coming through the window and an interior like an echo chamber with none of the reflections handled. Some dilettante out there has made a YouTube video selling people on needing an enormous stack of expensive audio gear when a $5 clip-on "computer mic" would probably perform as well (or better).As far as video/audio sync, apparently @Mafex has no experience in the industry. For 100 years (and even to this day) high-end production gear (both film and video) uses genlock to sync camera and audio recorder together. Else you are relying on the accuracy of the little 89 cent crystals in the camera and in the audio recorder to be accurate and track with temperature. To be sure, modern consumer gear has gotten much better as materials and manufacturing quality of even the cheapest commodity crystals has improved over time. To the point where you can probably depend on going for at least 10 minutes without slipping out of sync for more than a few frames. And that kind of sync is perfectly adequate for casual videos on YouTube. But it would get you thrown out of a film festival.

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2016, 06:25:16 pm
content: how much should i spend on lighting and what should i use? maybe DC stuff to get rid of that flicker? what should i do to improve the sound experience even with cheap mics? absorber mats maybe?

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2016, 07:01:32 pm
content: Lighting (fluorescent or LED) that uses switch-mode power supply (SMPS) runs at a high frequency and won't cause flicker. And, as you have observed, lighting powered with DC will not flicker, either. I found some surplus white LED panels (used for illuminating large outdoor signs) which are great for video lighting.The closer you can get your microphone to your mouth, the less influence you will get from ambient noise and room acoustic flaws. Headset (or "earset") microphones will hold the mic just a few mm from your mouth. Something like this costs US$15...https://www.amazon.com/Pyle-Pro-PMEM1-Headworn-Omni-Directional-Microphone/dp/B003D2S7HA

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 13, 2016, 01:14:37 am
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on November 12, 2016, 07:01:32 pm+1 for the headset/ear microphone approach. Whether wired or wireless, they ensure the microphone maintains a consistent position with respect to your mouth - so you don't have to worry about losing commentary when you turn your head. Using a fixed microphone properly requires a continuous awareness of exactly where the microphone is.Wired is cheap and you can get more for your money with less hassles than wireless - so long as being tied to one spot isn't a problem for you.

author: vk3yedotcom
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2016, 04:10:15 am
content: Also it's amazing how small change in mic position relative to your mouth can significantly change voice characteristics - and it's not just loudness. Bass components of your voice propagate differently to treble so if you move the mic around the sound changes. Even if you're using a lapel mic as in my first link in the previous page. At the start I'm slightly overdriving and the bass is a bit boomy. You don't want popping Ps and hissing Ssss but a bit of brightness cuts muffle and improves intelligibility. There's a bit less overdriving at 3:10 but it lacks highs. Whereas a slightly different position at 3:20 gives more highs. Something that's a constant position should greatly lessen these variations.

author: Mafex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2016, 11:40:57 am
content: Quote from: vk3yedotcom on November 13, 2016, 04:10:15 amwhat should i do, to avoid that popping hint hissing?and i didnt find a link to a microphone from you on the first side..

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2016, 02:56:27 pm
content: To prevent plosive sounds (P-popping) from hitting the microphone, you prevent the very low-frequency sound wave away from the mic. You can do this with:DISTANCE. Simply move the mic "out of range" of the low-frequency blast zone. However this has the disadvantage of also making the sound more distant and opening yourself up to picking up ambient noise and undesirable acoustics.FILTERING. Some microphones (and some microphone preamps) have low-frequency cut switches to roll off low frequencies which are not useful for speech pickup. However severe cases will cause distortion INSIDE the microphone BEFORE you reach any low-frequency cut filtering.POSITION. You can simply move the microphone "off-axis" so that it is not in direct line with the sound out of your mouth. When done properly, this will not affect the higher frequencies (which contribute to speech intelligibility), but it will move the microphone out of the "blast zone". A headset mic is particularly useful because it positions the sensitive mic capsule to the SIDE of the mouth and out of the "blast zone".If your microphone is picking up excessive ssss hissing, you can typically use notch filters and/or high-frequency rolloff to remove the offending frequencies from the audio signal. However the same kind of positioning to the side of the mouth from #3 above is also useful for reducing ssss hissing.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 14, 2016, 02:40:55 am
content: What Richard said.My order of priority would be:1. Position - Keep the mic close - but out of the 'blast zone'. I would try to sort out the problem using this alone, if at all possible.2. Distance - If you can't avoid the 'blast zone', they add distance bit by bit until you're OK. You don't want to get too far away or you'll start having other problems, as Richard has said.3. Filtering - For me, a last ditch course of action for dealing with 'blast zone' problems. The simple mechanical overload can, in itself, create distortion - and filtering won't be able to clean that up. Better to avoid it altogether, but if you have to deal with it this way, then try the above techniques first to minimise how much work the filtering has to do.There is another argument where filtering may be necessary - and that is if the low end is still too strong and can result in a booming sound or overload of other elements down the audio chain. This would normally be part of the EQ process on any half-decent mixing desk or audio software. Just remember, that if you do find this problem, the earlier in the audio chain it is dealt with, the better.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 14, 2016, 03:22:33 am
content: Here's an example of a simple speaking to camera with a clip-on microphone. The sound seems pretty clear to me. Possibly there is a bit of sibilance, but that might just be accurate reproduction. Sometimes you don't want excessive accuracy.https://youtu.be/Aa_ro7osD_o

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 14, 2016, 03:35:48 am
content: I just screen captured my video editing process, so will upload that soon.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 14, 2016, 04:10:39 pm
content: Quote from: Mafex on November 13, 2016, 11:40:57 amDon't put the microphone in front of your mouth.

author: ez24
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 14, 2016, 09:10:48 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 11, 2016, 07:45:35 amIf you want to find a place in the video, a dog clicker will put a spike in the audio waveform and it is very easy to see (it has a very sharp spike). You would not have to find pauses or watch the video to find the editing spots. It can be held off screen and it puts a marker in the video that is easy to find by using the audio waveform. Best tool I came across.this is what I use:https://www.amazon.com/Gmilk-Clicker-training-click-train/dp/B00Q86R47W/ref=sr_1_17?s=pet-supplies&ie=UTF8&qid=1479157722&sr=1-17&keywords=dog+clicker

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 14, 2016, 09:19:12 pm
content: Quote from: ez24 on November 14, 2016, 09:10:48 pmIsn't it best to see something on screenandhave a spike in the audio waveform - so you can line the two things up in the editor?

author: ez24
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 14, 2016, 09:26:42 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on November 14, 2016, 09:19:12 pmFor me no, the spike occurs where I want and it is very visible, much more than anything in the video. I never came across a sync problem. So I never look at the video to find the spot I am looking for. I may have to move a few frames to cut out the spike and may "watch" the video to fine tune it.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 14, 2016, 09:49:42 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on November 14, 2016, 09:19:12 pmRemember that you have the separate sound recording AND the sound track from the video camcorder. So typically you can manually (or automatically) sync the separate sound track using just the audio spikes without reference to the video at all. There are software gadgets like "PluralEyes" which will automatically match up and synch multiple audio and video clips together.The image is pretty much need only forCameras without sound. For example traditional cine film cameras.SLATE where the production, scene, take, etc. information identifies the film/video clip.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 15, 2016, 04:19:45 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on November 14, 2016, 09:19:12 pmThe clicker isn't being used to synchronise the audio and video ... it's being used to find an edit point.I can imagine it would be useful for a number of situations - but one example I might suggest is this: You have your camera rolling on a scene that might be reasonably static (which makes finding a visual cue impossible) and you need to grab a tool or some other item which will take you less than 10 seconds. To stop the recording and restart it would double the time you would take, plus you now have two clips that need to be joined - and you would need to trim them of the 'dead' time. By letting the camera run, you can use the clicker to identify the period you will want to cut out during editing. Using the audio track with a sharp spike clearly visible in the editing software will give you a precise reference point.I think it is an admirable idea - simple and effective.

author: imidis
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2016, 08:17:45 pm
content: That does sound like a great way to highlight spots to edit out.

author: ez24
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2016, 09:03:54 pm
content: Quote from: imidis on November 16, 2016, 08:17:45 pmDave talks fast and long so when he pauses that is his edit point.I once edited a video for a company that was suppose to be a funny training video. I spent a lot of time finding their edit points. I finally got the director to use the clicker and it made editing so much faster. So when he said "cut" he also used the clicker. I could immediately see the edit point on the audio line and did not have watch the video to find the cut points.

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 03, 2019, 10:22:41 pm
content: I know it's an old thread, but I hope this is helpful.You can sync audio between a proper, external recorder and a camera using a sync generator. That way both the audio and the video files will be stamped with the same timecode and it's trivial to align them.A simple product to do that is this:https://ambient.de/en/product/nanolockit/This is a usage example:https://ambient.de/tutorial/nanolockit-sync-tutorial-sound-devices-mixpre-3/And no, no affiliation with them at all.

author: TheNewLab
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2019, 06:01:38 am
content: humm, seems like a lot of trouble.for me, a clapper is easier..in fact, i just use a loud pop or snap. with digital video editors, syncing speech with video is just drag a little left or right. once done.I lay all of the audio with video. then cut up into clips and edit. Even mixing the audio from multiple sources. A DAW works easily for me. syncing is easy plus I can "massage" the audio to fit in nicely...My big mistake was asking an audio engineering friend for what mics I needed for YouTube videos back when...Bad move, "condenser only" I then went out and spent way too much, and much more complicated than needed.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 23, 2019, 06:47:18 am
content: Quote from: TheNewLab on April 23, 2019, 06:01:38 amIf you have to sync up your audio and video for Youtube video then you are doing it wrong. Arguing over which is the best/easiest way to sync is to miss the entire point of productive youtube video production.And if you have to process your audio (or video) for your Youtube videos then you are also doing it wrong.But hey, if that's what you want to do, knock yourself out.

author: TheNewLab
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 08:14:59 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 23, 2019, 06:47:18 amHmmm..maybe it is not necessary to do so much work for YouTube???I learned my method from film people..so maybe that is dumb for YouTube uploads

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 10:36:30 am
content: Quote from: TheNewLab on June 06, 2019, 08:14:59 amYep.If you want a classic example of this, look at Karl Von Mollers excellent series State of Electronics:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOepzhfgouq_rPxDx-kCn7QKarl is a professional film director, he shots and edits big budget TV commercial for huge clients and various films etc. He's your classic filmmaker, it's an art to him.But the result of bringing that same technique and methodology to Youtube, whilst it produces fabulous visual results, is just entirely lost on the Youtube audience.They don't care how much work you put into.They don't care that you hired actors to recreate scenes to "tell a story".They don't care that you traveled the country just to shoot location material.They don't care that you had to buy stock footage and get formal legal rights to every single second of footage.They don't care that you color graded it and fussed over every visual detail.They don't care that you had to get all the formal release forms signed before you could air their footage.etcKarl spent several years travelling the country interviewing people, huge interviews, many hours long, and I think it was something like 5 years before he actually released anything.And then he was surprised that people were like "Yeah, that's ok" and that it didn't get many views or much praise. I'm sure he's proud of what he's done, and rightly so, but the sad fact is he could have just dumped the raw interview footage, or did some basic editing in a day like I do to make it slightly more polished and it would have gotten the same views and feedback. Welcome to youtube.This is why it's just crazy to use film industry techniques on Youtube and think that's it's going to worthwhile, it's almost always a waste of time.

author: thinkfat
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 11:32:08 am
content: Thanks a lot for the pointer. I've watched a couple of episodes now and the content is visually top notch.The thing that ticks me off is, however, the overall presentation: It feels like an hour-long trailer.What I feel missing is a narrator that gives coherence, that leads through the topic of each episode and helps bring the message across. While I'm writing this, the episode "Hunters & Collectors" in running in the background. What each of the individuals has to say is an important piece of story, but it feels, like, glued together with no red line to follow. It just doesn't feel like a story being told.The background music is somehow distracting in its repetitiveness.But maybe that's just me

author: orion242
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 01:33:44 pm
content: Quote from: thinkfat on June 06, 2019, 11:32:08 amThis drives me insane. If its not a music video or musical, why the in holy hell put music in with people talking?!? Are the babbling people saying nothing of importance and they feel adding music will somehow retain audience?Beyond distracting, its annoying as hell and seemly more and more common.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 07:01:29 pm
content: This question was asked before, and a few relevant threads that I like are:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/reviews/best-camera-for-shooting-youtube-videos/https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/good-camera-for-electronics-youtube-videos/https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/thoughts-on-avchd-vs-mp4-for-technology-videos-on-youtube/

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 07:58:51 am
content: Quote from: thinkfat on June 06, 2019, 11:32:08 amNo, that was a common complaint IIRC.Regardless of how you think the content turned out, the point I was trying to make is the thinking that went behind it was big director movie oriented, he went in with a story focus instead of just letting each interview fly on it's own, and I think that ultimately stifled the content in many ways.I remember him coming to my (old) lab and I asked what the direction he wanted to go with the story he was trying to tell, and he wouldn't tell me because it might spoil my responses and he wanted my answer to be spontaneous. Fair enough I thought, but then he fired questions at me and I instantly realised they could have had several answers and direction based on the story, and it was kinda confusing. And I kind of see a bit of that in the final videos. Add to that that he spent several years shooting all this material and your ideas of the story evolve etc, but then you've got all this old footage that was kinda shot a certain way with specific questions and responses etc.I'm sure that works great if you are directing a film and have the resources and budget to re-shoot and change stuff on the fly etc, but it's an awful lot of effort for a Youtube video or series. But I am in awe of the amount of effort he went into this over years, and I've love to see a dump of the raw footage interviews.Contrast that with my crude effort with the interviewing one of the same people, I just rocked up with a camera and no real idea what I'd talk about, and I edited it simply into a 5 parts series that was quite well received, all for hardly any effort.Of course comparing the quality of the two is like chalk and cheese, but if you want to produce content for Youtube and do it effectively and consistently, you have to make "just good enough" content.About the only creator who I can think of who puts massive work into youtube video production and is able to pull it off would be Captain Disillusion.Then you have the likes of Tom Scott who travel the world making video, going to all that effort, visiting these fantastic and interesting locations and people, and then produce (albeit good) short videos with only relatively small snippets of info. I always think to myself "wow, if I went all the way there I would have shot the crap of that place, and interviewed them for hours" etc and would dump a whole ton of content. But nope, you get a 5min spiffy summary video

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 09:56:31 am
content: Quote from: TheNewLab on June 06, 2019, 08:14:59 amIt's not "youtube" per se, but the type of audience you want to cater and the return you expect. Your original question is specific to re-create a EEVBlog experience, thus you are probably targeting the same crowd (as I do with my own channel) and is talking to the right person. In this particular case, it is a heavy handed approach and any extra editing step has diminishing returns, especially for "one-man bands".On the other hand, the fact youtube has extremely popular channels with heavy editing, camera angles, etc. is a testament that a broader audience will require a shorter and more appealing video. Also, depending on the expected returns, some employ a relatively large crew, which can help with the editing.I think examples of a heavily cut and rehearsed are w2aew and ElectroBOOM - although the latter has much more editing, special effects, transitions, changes of camera and scenario, etc.One example of a popular channel with an entire crew is GreatScott.Quote from: EEVblog on June 06, 2019, 10:36:30 amI recall this dude. I unsubscribed after his first tantrum of frustration when folks here on EEV were providing candid feedback. I had no idea he was still doing videos.Among the feedback was the "Discovery channel" style of interviews with rapid scene changes and very little room to get a reasonable train of thought from each interviewed person.Quote from: EEVblog on June 06, 2019, 10:36:30 amTo be fair, most people don't care how much effort is put into the making of any movie anymore (perhaps CGI removed part of the magic of filmmaking, but I digress). This includes big box office ones - I am looking at movies like the Hobbit trilogy, for example. The narrative is important and must be tailored to the audience you want to cater.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 11:25:25 am
content: QuoteIt's not "youtube" per se, but the type of audience you want to cater and the return you expect. Your original question is specific to re-create a EEVBlog experience, thus you are probably targeting the same crowd (as I do with my own channel) and is talking to the right person. In this particular case, it is a heavy handed approach and any extra editing step has diminishing returns, especially for "one-man bands".Quite true.QuoteI'd say may require. There was a female blogger that I think was #1 on Youtube for a brief period that shot all her videos on her phone.I think examples of a heavily cut and rehearsed are w2aew All his videos used to be a couple of single takes stitched together like mine. Haven't watched in a while though.QuoteGreatScott has a crew?I thought he was a one man band?QuoteThat was an unfortunate incident.QuoteQuite true.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 01:45:41 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on June 07, 2019, 11:25:25 amYeah, you are right.Quote from: EEVblog on June 07, 2019, 11:25:25 amYou may be right about him. It's that his content is so concise and well put together that I thought he put more effort on this.Quote from: EEVblog on June 07, 2019, 11:25:25 amMaybe I need to review all my concepts...At a certain video or two I had the impression someone else (or many) were behind the camera, but I may be totally wrong again.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 11:39:38 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on June 07, 2019, 01:45:41 pmNevermind. I was thinking about a different Scott: Tom Scott.(and he doesn't seem to have a crew either)

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:10:14 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on June 07, 2019, 11:39:38 pmTom used to have a sidekick who was often in his 2nd channel videos, I think the sound and camera guy. Not sure if he went on all the trips though. Not sure if still there.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:14:55 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on June 07, 2019, 01:45:41 pmWe had him on the Amp Hour once where he discussed it. IIRC he put work into the handwritten notes and diagrams, and made sure the experiments worked first, but then just pretty much whinged it like I do. But when you are writing those notes are thinking it though anyway.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 06:31:47 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on June 08, 2019, 01:14:55 am"whinged it" or "winged it"?I can only think that the formermightbe associated with a rant video, whereas the latter sounds more like your style on any video.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 06:43:52 am
content: Quote from: Brumby on June 08, 2019, 06:31:47 am

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 08:20:34 am
content: As for how "good" a video is, well there are several aspects which come into this discussion.Technical. Elements such as lighting and exposure, sound level and clarity, focus, framing and camera shake are the big ones that immediately come to mind. Get any of these wrong and you'll lose audience - guaranteed. White balance isn't usually a major factor unless colour is important or it's way off.Material. This is going to depend on your target audience - and for some subjects that could be a subset of your wider audience. This is bound to happen to any blogger unless you keep to a very narrow range of subjects, which is going to limit what you can do. Dave is no exception - and accepts the fact that not every video is going to appeal to every subscriber.Structure and editing. A combination of presentation style and the needs of a subject. No simple comment to distinguish between what is necessary and what is not here.The story. This varies in detail, but not the need. If there is no train of thought to keep the viewer clearly informed all the way, then as soon as they get confused or bored, they are likely to close the window and move on.... and they may think twice about coming back.Dave covers all these elements in his videos (IMHO). How adequately will inevitably be subject to individual taste, but considering his following, I think he has a formula that works well enough.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 12:50:25 pm
content: Quote from: Brumby on June 08, 2019, 08:20:34 amI think I do audio and lighting and colour balance well enough, and that's all done in-camera.One thing I think I really do well is framing. I take care in framing stuff and think I choose good shots and angles. I hate those top-down videos for example, I try and do it so what I see, you see. That is why I always shoot my video through what I see on the camcorder LCD, not what my eyes see from another angle. Also, i get depth of field right on subjects that need it, no arty-farty bokehI have no real structure or major editing. No scripts, not much thought before hand. Almost all videos are shot in sequence and edited in the sequence shot. So I score low in that.Material. Yes, the channels with more focused and content content (esp in the tech space) get the most views, appeal to a larger audience, and get a high subscriber click-through rate. e.g. GreatScott gives the exact edited 7min videos every time. Channels like mine with 20 different videos styles do less well, but they get the flexibility to do more varied stuff.If there is one thing I'd say don't copy me on, it's this, you stand less chance of picking up and maintaining an audience, people like consistency.