Thread: Youtube video editing critique please

I'm by no means an expert, but for me the thing that stood out was there was a hell of a lot of panning and zooming going on.

I know empty offices aren't the most visual of subjects and a pan shows the whole room, but for me it all seems a tad too much. Similarly with the outdoor shots.

Just my opinion BTW.

The message was clear and we got to see the place. The narration was clear and concise, and the music was about right for the subject for me, so on the whole a pretty good job I'd say (apart from the pans )

Gotta agree with M1M about the panning and zooms.

But I'd add dissolves to that. Straight cuts are far more professional. Traditionally dissolves are used to show the passing of time (though this is pretty passé now) or location. And, of course, in motages where you might want to go from a close up of a bunch of flowers to a bride and groom for example. But overuse between lots of interior or exterior office scenes just looks lazy.

It's also not generally good to cut from a moving shot to a still or vice versa. Let your pan/tilt come to a stop before cutting to a static (which would probably mean a re-shoot in this case).

The shots, both inside and out, are pretty good - they're mainly clear & well composed and I only noticed one that wasn't square.

There are a few problems though. The camera has clearly been left of auto-exposure which has some nasty effects - look at the windows and chairs around 42-45 seconds as the camera tries to work out an exposure (and settles for one where the comfortable reception chairs are woefully under-exposed).

Most importantly, though, the shots showed us the things that a potential client would be interested in.

The script, recording and narration of the v/o was very good. Well paced and clearly spoken. The musak was appropriate and mixed down to a sensible level.

Things I would like to see done to improve it (apart from above):

Cheap: The script talks of local amenities and local railway stations. Show them- one shot of a busy street with Cafes etc, a station frontage and a sign for the other station, maybe.

More expensive (unless you have lots of professional looking people you can call on):
Populate the communal office areas (but I'd think not the individual office spaces - as this is the bit the client will want to identify with as his own) with young and older professional-type looking actors. For example:
Show someone behind the reception desk (the script refers to staff then shows an empty reception - that's not good)
Show one or two people rising from the reception area to greet someone else who's come sown to meet them.
Show one person passing another a cup of coffee in the kitchen area.
Show a meeting going on in the meeting room.

This all would take a lot of time to stage, but it will bring life to the office.

People looking to rent office space will want to think of themselves as go-ahead synamic business types. Give them the images that they can imagine themsleves being part of.

You're not just selling office space - you're selling an image.

I'm not saying it was a bad video. But you asked how it might compare to a professional job. I'm not a pro, but I'm beginning to understand what to look for in other's work so as to improve my own efforts.

Not read the above yet.

If I was paying I would be happy with that.

As a film maker I would say that the use of all the tracking shots does not appear to have been edited with regard to what came befor or after - pan left - pan right - pan to pan shot - pan to zoomed in to out.

Get my drift? A more cnsisten and deliberate approach may be better - I didnt feel like I was on a tour - more a roller coaster .

I have been criticiased for too much zooming. Try to replace zooms with tracks when poss. Zoom only when shot tells a story or communicated with surrounding shots as part of the video 'narrative'.

Loose the idents - the large transparent one is expecially irritating.

Read above - yea - the auto exposre - NEVER SHOOT WITH AUTO ANYTHING ON EVER NEVER NOT NO NO NO NOT EVEN AT THE END OF TIME ITSELF.

Best to use manual everything - unless the london police are chasing you on a demo brandishing weapons - lols.

Cut down on the panning, and let them finish before dissolving/cutting to the next shot.

Some of the pans seemed pointless as we seen the same thing in a static shot either before or after the pan.

Some people in the shots as talked about above would help, get a few of the people who work there to 'act'. You just need one person behind reception and get two others to play the part of Peter and Priscilla Public.

Keep windows and doorways behind you as much as possible, so you don't get problems with exposure.

Somehow reminds me of the place where Reggie Perrin worked, don't know why.

Good delivery on the v/o but leave a few gaps and let the visuals tell the story.

Titles were good and easy to read. Good job, just needs some work done on it.

I thought it was very well done. I somewhat agree with those above about the zooms and such, but to me it was more the frequent angle switches than anything else. I would have left in the zooming, and just not switch views or angles as quickly or as often.
Well done though!

Hey thanks for the advice guys, taking it all on board for when i do my next one.
just a quick question, which i know has been put in FAQs but in your opinions what is the best software to use to edit in?

thanks for the advice guys, im taking it all on board and will use it to improve my next ones i do.
I will post them up to and hopefully show some improvement

thanks

Keep off the zoom wide rocker button, and use much less tripod moves, I believe this has been covered by others.

Don't transition into similar shots..!