Comment by David

March 28, 2006 @ 7:00 pm

You couldn’t be more correct about the flood of poor quality video. I can’t help but notice the popularity of Google Video and Youtube, though. Most of what is on those sites is terrible quality, with terrible content.

In my opinion, any Internet marketers that intend to use video should must be aware that it’s a different medium, and conduct themsleves accordingly.

You need to interact and to engage your audience. You can’t just sit there and drone into the camera.

Comment by Jason Moffatt

March 29, 2006 @ 3:58 pm

Video has to entertain.

You can get away with poor quality video, but it’s gotta be something hilarious, or something people are dying to see.

Internet Marketing is not entertaining to most people.

Therefore the quality must be superb. If it’s not, you better be exposing some massive strategies if you want to hold anyones attention.

Audio is a interesting thing as well.

People will listen to bland content as long as the audio is crisp and clear.

However people will turn off great content if the audio is not crisp and clear.

I recently was listening to a audio product that costs near $1500 and the audio sounds like S%#@. It was horrid. I was baffled the marketer even let the recording go out.

With so many options available, making decent video is not that hard. I personally love using the .FLV fuction in Camtasia.

It’s fast, simple, and effective. I simply plug in my digital video camera into my computer, turn on Camtasia, and hit record.

Then I ftp it to a server and BAM, you got some video.

I just need to work on lighting. I live in a Dark Dungeon.

Comment by Shaune

March 30, 2006 @ 9:26 pm

I did see today that an online video should be less than 2 minutes. I do agree 100%.

It’s a great exercise in “diluting the copy”, boiling it down, boiling it down, until it’s just the really good, captivating, material.

As for bad quality audio…I have to tell you Moffatt, some of the copywriting coaching recordings are not great quality.

As David has said, “Isn’t there a great teleconference recording company?” I don’t think so.

You just can’t seem to find a reliable one.

My next move is to get the software and hardware to do it myself. In the meantime, do I just not make the material I have available?

I say put it out.

The information is great quality and hopefully I’m passionate enough to hold everyone’s attention. : )

Comment by Zack

May 28, 2007 @ 9:24 am

Shaune, I think this was right on when you originally posted it–and over a YEAR later, nothing has changed! Well, in fact your prediction,

“And then there’s the pathetic homegrown style video. Be warned, there’s about to be a flood of these.”

has certainly come true and the signal to noise ratio is now something like 1:10,000 (or worse).

I will now point out how happy I am that this has come to pass. For those of us who DO “get it” this is a marvelous opportunity to differentiate and have our top-quality work seen and appreciated. Gee, I wonder if that will mean vastly improved response rates?

Great post—just found your blog and I’m looking forward to catching up on your other posts.

Be well!

-Zack